HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-16-1998 Planning Commission Meeting Packet CITY OF
OAK 'PARK HEIGHTS
14168 N. 67th S)reet • Box 2007.Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 • Phone: (612) 439 -4439 FAX 439-0574
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
THURSDAY, JULY 16, 1998
7:00 P.M.
7:00 I. Call To Order /Approval of Agenda
II. Roll Call
III. Approve Planning Commission Minutes - June 18,1998 (1)
(To be distributed at meeting)
7:05 IV. Public Hearings:
A. Valley Senior Services Alliance (2) (3)
B. Establish a Central Business Zoning District and Map Amendment (4) (5)
C. Lower Oak Park Heights Rezoning from R -2 to 0, Open Space (6) (7)
D. Amendments to Subdivision Ordinance to Include the Planning Commission
and Amend the Park Dedication Requirements (8) (9)
8:30 V. Old Business:
A. Review Design Guidelines Draft (10)
B. Comprehensive Plan Update (11)
8:50 VI. New Business:
8:55 VII. Government Training Service - Land Use Planning Seminar (12)
9:00 VIII. Adjournment
Next Meeting: August 20, 1998 - 7:00 p.m.
Oak Park Heights City Hall
Tree City U.S.A.
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, THURSDAY, JUNE 11, 1998
Call To Order: City Planner, Scott Richards called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Present:
Commissioners Dahlquist, Hedlund, Schultz, Vogt and Wasescha. Staff present: City Administrator
Melena, Administrative Assistant Mesko, and Community Development Secretary Hultman. City
Consultants present: Assistant City Planner, Brad Digre. Absent: None.
Introductions:
City Planner Richards introduced himself and gave a brief history of his qualifications and
involvement with the City. This introduction was followed by each individual present giving a
brief self introduction. As they were not in attendance for this organizational meeting, City
Planner Richards provided introductions for Public Works Director Johnson, City Engineer
Anderlik and Arborist Widin as consultants the Commission will become acquainted with as
the issues require.
Role of Planning Commission and City Council in Local Government:
City Planner Richards briefed the Commission as to the materials they received with their meeting
packets and explained the general process of planning decisions, as well as what is expected of the
Commission as an advisory board.
Role of Staff /Consultant in Planning Decision Making Process:
City Planner Richards explained that the role of staff and consultants in the planning decision making
process is to aid the group with the process by making available to them the information they need to
make informed decisions.
Review of Planning Commission Bylaws and Zoning Ordinance Amendment:
City Planner Richards discussed, in detail, the Planning Commission Bylaws and Zoning Ordinance
Amendment #98- 401 -01. Discussion was held pertaining to the open meeting law and conflict of
interest. Robert's Rule of Order will be followed for meeting procedures. Meeting agendas, minutes
and packet items will be kept for future reference. Audio recordings of meetings will also be kept for
a period of six months.
Discussion was held as to the number of Public Hearing held on an average. City Planner Richards
indicated that the Planning Commission will be responsible for conducting the Public Hearings and
suggested that the Commission may wish to meet more than one time per month, to allow adequate
time for dealing with issues. City Planner Richards further suggested that the Commission may wish
to have a Commissioner present at City Council meetings when issues they have made
recommendations on is scheduled on the agenda. This representation could be rotated among the
members of the Commission.
City Planner Richards indicated that training will be made available through Government Training
Service sometime Fall of 1998 or Spring of 1999 and that he would let Commission know more as
he does.
Discussion was held as to the importance of site investigations. City Administrator Melena
mentioned that other cities place signs at site investigation areas to ensure the location of
investigation. City Planner Richards suggested that this is something he should speak with Public
Works Directors Johnson about. This issue will be addressed at a future meeting of the
Commission.
Planning Commission Minutes - 2
Planning: an Overview:
City Planner Richards indicated that an order for a publication, The Job of Planning Commission,
had been placed and should arrive shortly. He indicated that this publication was very beneficial for
use as guidance through the planning process.
Comprehensive Plan:
City Planner Richards explained and discussion was held pertaining to the legal requirement,
process, and use of a comprehensive plan. He indicated that the City's current plan was adopted in
1980 -81 and has had several amendments to it since that time. He indicated that it is the City
Council's desire to have the Planning Commission address the task of preparing an updated
comprehensive plan for the City as the City has changed a great deal since the adoption of the 1980-
81 Comprehensive Plan. Council wants the Commission to address the future outlook of the City,
take an inventory of what is going on and address the City's future needs. City Planner Richards
stated that Metropolitan Council is preparing a Regional Blueprint, which is a publication that lays out
the formats and element for preparing a comprehensive plan and that each member will be provided
with a copy when it becomes available.
Zoning:
Discussion was held pertaining the Administrative section of the zoning ordinance and how requests
for zoning issues, conditional uses, variances, and planned unit development are processed by the
City. City Planner Richards explained the layout of the zoning code, discussed the process at
length and noted that the City Council serves as the Board of Appeals. He mentioned that future
projects the Commission will be looking at will include design review and signage ordinance revision.
Subdivision Ordinance 402 was unavailable for review. Community Secretary Hultman was directed
to obtain a copy and make it available for distribution to the Commission members at its meeting of
June 18, 1998.
Upcoming Meeting /Agenda:
City Planner Richards distributed a tentative agenda for the next scheduled Commission meeting to
be held in the City Council Chamber of the Oak Park Heights City Hall at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday,
June 18, 1998.
Adjournment: City Planner Richards announced the organizational meeting of the Oak Parks
Heights Planning Commission to be adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Julie Hultman, Secretary
Community Development
Enclosure 1
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, THURSDAY, JUNE 18, 1998
Call To Order: Commissioner Wasescha called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present:
Commissioners Dahlquist, Hedlund, Vogt and Wasescha. Staff present: Community
Development Secretary Hultman. City Consultants present: City Planner, Scott Richards and
Assistant City Planner, Brad Digre. Absent: Commissioner Schultz.
Approval of Agenda: Dahlquist, seconded by Wasescha, moved to approve the agenda as
presented. Motion carried. 4 -0.
Approval of June 11, 1998 Commission Minutes: Hedlund, seconded by Wasescha,
moved to approve June 11, 1998 Commission Minutes with the revision of Government
Training Service dates to "Fall of 1998 or Spring of 1999." Motion carried. 4 -0.
Election of Officers: Nominations were sought from the Commission for the election of
Chairperson and Vice Chairperson for the first term of the newly formed Planning
Commission.
Wasescha, seconded by Vogt, moved to elect Hedlund to serve as Chairperson. Motion
carried.
Wasescha, seconded by Vogt, moved to elect Dahlquist to serve as Vice Chairperson.
Motion carried.
The elected Chairperson and Vice Chairperson shall serve until the annual organizational
meeting, scheduled for March of 1999, at which time new Officers will be elected to serve two
year terms.
Discussion of Establishing a Central Business District:
Planner Richards updated the Commission as to the area encompassed within the proposed
Central Business District (CBD). Outlining the draft Ordinance Section 401.301, CBD Central
Business District, he indicated that the establishment of a Central Business District would
allow for better flexability with the mix of retail uses. The proposal for the district is that of a
downtown, possibly concentrating businesses within the B -2, General Business District and
locating business warehouses between the B -2, General Business District and the B -1,
Neighborhood Business District, which is comprised mainly of office space, to allow for a
blend of uses.
General discussion ensued. The Commission directed that Section 401.301.E, #3 of the draft
ordinance be amended to include motorized equipment sale and rental as an accessory use.
A Public Hearing will be held on this matter at 7:00 p.m., Thursday, July 16, 1998 at the Oak
Park Heights City Hall.
Planning Commission Minutes - 2
Preliminary Plans for Valley Senior Services Alliance (VSSA):
The Commission reviewed preliminary plans as proposed by VSSA. Discussion
ensued pertaining to the design of roadways and neighborhood layout. Planner
Richards explained the presented roadway design and the flow of area access, noting
that he felt that the design appears to be well laid out.
A Public Hearing will be held on this matter at 7:00 p.m., Thursday, July 16, 1998 at the
Oak Park Heights City Hall.
Lower Oak Park Heights Rezoning:
Discussion was held pertaining the possible rezoning of lower Oak Park Heights from
its present zone classification of R -3, Multiple Family District to that of 0, Open Space.
This rezoning would affect the neighborhood which was designated for the St. Croix
River Bridge Crossing and where homes were removed. This zoning change would give
the City more control over the potential reuse of the property in the event it is sold by
MnDOT, who has purchased most of the properties in this neighborhood.
A Public Hearing will be held on this matter at 7:00 p.m., Thursday, July 16, 1998 at the
Oak Park Heights City Hall.
Review Design Guidelines Draft:
The Commission reviewed Oak Park Heights Design Guidelines draft, designed to
assist in determining commercial design guidelines. The Commission directed that the
Environment Section should be amended to reflect the steepness of the slope level to
more accurately reflect the norm for stormwater ponding.
Comprehensive Plan Update:
Planner Richards indicated that City staff has been working with the City Council in
updating the Comprehensive Plan and that the City Council has directed the task of
developing a Comprehensive Plan draft to the Planning Commission. City staff will be
providing a draft Planning Tactics, Inventory and Policy Plan for the Commission's
review at a future meeting.
Adjournment: Commissioner Wasescha, seconded by Vogt, moved to adjourn at 9:25
p.m. Motion carried. 4 -0.
Respectfully submitted,
Julie Hultman, Secretary
Community Development
•
CITY OF
EticLosuRE z
• OAK PARK HEIGHTS
- AC: _' 14168 N. 57th Street • Box 2007.Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 • Phone: (612) 439 -4439 • FAX 439 -0574
•
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
FOR AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY
The Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights will hold a Public Hearing on
Thursday. July 16. 1998 at 7:00 p.m. at Oak Park Heights City Hall at 141.68 North 57th Street to
discuss the the request by Valley Senior Services Alliance to develop an assisted living facility
on the south side of the proposed 58th Street North extension west of Oakgreen Avenue and east
of Norell Avenue.
All who wish to comment are asked to attend and be heard.
Date: June 30. 1998
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COLrNCIL
Thomas M. Melena
City Administrator
Tree City U.S.A.
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
3 1
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: 10 July 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Valley Senior Services Alliance:
PUD Concept Plan Review
FILE NO: 798.02 - 98.02
BACKGROUND
Application. Valley Senior Services Alliance (VSSA) has made application for rezoning
to Planned Unit Development and Concept Plan approval of the Haase property south of
58th Street. The property is now zoned 0, Open Space Conservation. The property to the
south of 58th Street is part of the PUD for senior housing and care facilities, the remaining
property to the north of 58th Street is proposed to be rezoned to CBD, Central Business
District and be developed as part of the City's Town Center concept.
VSSA is a non - profit organization funded by Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted
Living, Inc., Lakeview Hospital, and Croixdale Residence and Apartments. The alliance
is dedicated to serving older adults in Washington County and the St. Croix Valley.
Market. The campus for older adults south of 58th Street would include duplex and
cottage units, independent living apartments and cooperative, assisting living facilities,
dementia /Alzheimer living facilities, and a central area that will provide health services,
food service, and laundry. The facilities would be situated around a City park with
extensive trail systems providing connections internal to the site and to neighborhoods and
commercial areas that surround the site.
The applicants have completed a comprehensive market study and have concluded that
an opportunity exists in that there are few older adult services currently in place in the Oak
Park Heights /Stillwater area. The demand for services and housing facilities, as provided
with the planned VSSA development, are expected to increase by more than 30 percent
in the St. Croix Valley over the next decade.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2- 595 -9636 FAX 6 1 2- 595 -9837 E -MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
t
e
i
Staging. The development is planned to be constructed in two phases. Phase I is
expected to begin the Fall of 1998 as soon as financing, plans and approvals are in place.
Phase I will consist of 90 units of independent living apartments, 36 Alzheimer /dementia
units, 126 assisted living units, 42 duplex units, and central facilities including dietary/
kitchen, laundry and other central offices and amenities. After market absorption of Phase
I, Phase II is planned to consist of 90 independent living cooperative units, 68 skilled
nursing units, and 108 cottages, quad homes and duplex units. Adult day care and other
central services and amenities would also be added at this time.
Layout. The development has been designed to complement the surrounding current
and planned property uses. As requested by neighbors in the Autumn Ridge and River
Hills neighborhoods, streets that had been planned to continue into this property will not
be constructed. Significant setbacks have been provided from existing single family
homes. Trails throughout the project will wrap around lakes and ponds on the site and link
existing trails to the City Park that will be developed as part of the project. The project has
also been phased to provide a reasonable transition of land uses and densities. Low
density cottages and duplexes are adjacent to existing single family and the multi story,
multi family housing and health care facilities are in the center of the development and
towards 58th Street, adjacent to the areas planned for future commercial uses.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A - Site Plan
Exhibit B - Conceptual Grading Plan
Exhibit C - Conceptual Utility Plan
Exhibit D - Site Section - Assisted Living Facility to River Hills Neighborhood
Exhibit E - Floor Plans (Three Sheets)
Exhibit F - Park Dedication Memo Dated 24 June 1998
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan. The subject site is currently designated for low density residential
by the City's 1991 Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment. In that the City is
currently in the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan, the new Land Use Map and
text will be revised to reflect a combination of high density /mid density and low density
residential use as well as the City park land if the City is agreeable to the proposed uses
as reflected in this concept plan. The Planning Commission and City Council should
comment at this time regarding the overall change in land uses for the area in question.
Zoning. The entire site is currently zoned 0, Open Space Conservation. The area to the
south of 58th Street will be zoned PUD with the R -B, Residential Business - Institutional
District as the underlying basis for zoning standards. Due to the variety in types of uses
Page 2
and densities, the PUD zoning and approvals will allow for a comprehensive approach to
evaluating and addressing the applicant's proposal. Also, it allows for a reasonable
method for review and approval of a phased development.
Adjacent Uses. Uses adjacent to the subject site are listed below. The proposed uses
of the site are generally compatible with others in the area. However, attention will need
to be given to protecting the single family neighborhoods to the east and west from any
potential impacts.
• North of Site: Present zoning - partially 0, Open Space and partially B -2, General
Business District. Present use - some vacant, a Wal -Mart, auto salvage and retail
near Highway 36.
• South of Site: Not in City - Baytown Township. Present use - large lot single
family.
• East of Site: Present zoning - partially 0, Open Space and partially R -1, Single
Family Residential. Present use - single family neighborhoods (River Hills) /some
vacant land.
• West of Site: Present zoning - partially R -1, partially 0, Open Space. Present use
- single family neighborhood (Autumn Ridge) and the Environmental Learning
Center for High School.
Subdivision. As part of the General Plan of Development approval process, a
preliminary plat will be presented for review. Skip Sorenson, the project architect, has
indicated that the main campus, which includes the Town Center, assisted housing,
independent living, etc. would be platted as one lot. The two park facilities would be
platted as two separate lots, and the 90 unit senior cooperative building as one lot. The
clusters of twinhomes in the first phase would be platted as two separate lots and the
second phase of housing in the lower acreage would be platted initially as an outlot. The
roadways would be platted to City standards for right -of -way and would be dedicated to
the City.
General Design Review. Upon review of the concept plan, our office has the following
general comments on the layout of the project:
1. It appears as though the main entrance of the facility faces south, away from 58th
Street. The employee parking and what appears to be the service entrance would
be accessed off of 58th. Wouldn't the complex be more accessible and less
confusing to visitors if its orientation and front entrance was to 58th? It seems as
though the front facade /entrance should be moved to welcome people to the
complex off the main access road.
Page 3
2. The plans should be reviewed by the Fire Chief, Police Chief and others concerned
with emergency vehicle access to determine if proper access is being allowed for
the complex.
3. Use of combined driveways, as indicated for the single family dwellings in Phase
II should be encouraged for all units.
4. Related to the twinhome development in the northwest corner of Phase I, the two
twinhomes in the center area created by the roadway are in an awkward
configuration. Possibly the southerly facing twinhome could be oriented to the
west, creating more usable open space.
5. The orientation of buildings, especially in Phase II, should be altered slightly so that
homes do not directly line up with street ends.
6. The three cul-de -sacs do not meet City standards for maximum length. The dead -
end streets should be redesigned to reconnect with the main drive or be
considerably shortened.
7. Medians are not provided for the primary entrance to the main campus.
8. The lone house in Phase II, adjacent to the southeast pond, seems out of context.
It should be combined with other existing homes or additional homes could be
added.
9. The driveway for the twinhomes in the northeast corner of Phase in should line up
with the entrance to the senior cooperative building.
10. The City trail along 58th Street should be identified on the plans to show
interconnections.
11. More trail crosswalks should be identified on the plans in anticipation of
pedestrian /bicycle movements through the site.
12. The trail system should be extended in Phase II so that it follows the main roadway
system throughout the development.
Park Dedication. Section 402.08 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires a land dedication
for residential development for the construction of City parks. The City has planned a park
in this area since the property was first annexed. When the surrounding property was
planned for single family residential, the Park Commission had developed a plan for a 28
acre park with two park shelters, large child play area, a baseball /softball field, soccer field
and a trail system around the existing wetland complex. The VSSA project is proposing
the dedication of park land to the City and the construction of an extensive trail system.
Page 4
Based upon the current development program for both Phase I and II of the project, the
park dedication requirements were calculated by our office in a memo dated 24 June 1998.
The memo is attached as Exhibit F. The land dedication for that area developed
residentially south of 58th Street would be 10.95 acres. The area north of 58th Street,
which is to be developed with commercial land uses, would require a cash dedication
equaling $1,750 per acre.
Most of the land proposed to be dedicated is encumbered with the existing wetland
complexes that are likely to be expanded as part of the project. Additionally, much of the
land to be dedicated is near 58th Street and is not usable for park purposes. A more
accurate calculation of the area to be covered by wetlands will be needed to determine
a reasonable land dedication. Staff makes these initial recommendations in terms of park
dedication for review and comment by the Park Commission, Planning Commission and
City Council.
1. A reasonable, usable land area, free of wetland /storm water ponding encumbrances
be dedicated to the City for park land purposes.
2. VSSA is to grade, seed /sod and landscape all areas to be dedicated as City Park
to the City's satisfaction before it is dedicated to the City.
3. VSSA is to construct all of the paths shown on the approved plan (built to City
specifications as indicated in the Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Trail
System Plan). The trails within the dedicated park land will be maintained by the
City. Trail maintenance will be paid for by a "special service district" funded in part
by VSSA. All trails outside of the park lands shall be the maintenance responsibility
of VSSA.
4. VSSA shall be responsible for construction of an enclosed park shelter with toilet
facilities; design of such shall be agreed to by the City and VSSA.
5. VSSA shall construct the parking lot adjacent to the park shelter.
6. VSSA shall construct a child's play area to the specifications of the Park
Commission and City Council.
The specifics of each of these recommendations will need to be discussed further as part
of the General Plan of Development review and approval.
Assessments. The applicant will be required to pay all assessments for the construction
of 58th Street as well as area changes (sewer, water, and storm water fees) at the time of
final plat approval. The amount of these fees will be calculated by the City Engineer.
Page 5
Environmental Impact. A review of the "Guide to the Rules" of the Minnesota
Environmental Review Program reveals that the proposed development will not create the
need for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW).
Lot Area and Width. Section 401.06.B.14 of the Zoning Ordinance states that there is
no maximum lot area or lot width for properties developed as PUD. Generally, there is
sufficient area within the 100+ acre site to accommodate the propose development.
Setbacks. Within a PUD Zoning District, the base district setback requirements are
applied only to the perimeter of the property. Separation of the structures on the interior
of the development are required to be a minimum of 20 feet or one -half the sum of the two
building heights. It appears from the preliminary site plan that all of the buildings will be
constructed well beyond the perimeter setback requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
More information will need to be provided as part of the General Plan of Development to
determine the interior setback requirements.
Site Access. The site will be accessed off of three locations on 58th Street. The City
Engineer should comment on the location of these curb cuts as to any existing or potential
conflicts with proposed intersections. The City had planned for the eventual extension of
roadways in this area from both the Autumn Ridge and River Hills neighborhoods. With
the change in land use and residential densities proposed for the VSSA development, the
streets will not be continued and made a part of the street network for this area. The
project site plan has indicated potential outlots that could be retained in Phase !Ito allow
for an extension of the roadways into the high school area or into the undeveloped area
of Baytown Township that is south and west of the VSSA site. The Planning Commission
and City Council should discuss these outlot locations.
Traffic Impact. The applicant has indicated that it will provide a traffic study that will
estimate the volumes of traffic to be generated by this development and its impact on the
local street network. The traffic study will be subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer.
Off- Street Parking. The plans have not been developed to a level of detail in order to
analyze the off - street parking demands. Much of the main campus will utilize underground
parking to meet the ordinance requirements. Of critical importance throughout the
development will be the provision of adequate visitor parking stalls within all aspects of the
VSSA project. Due to the fact that many of the residents, especially in the main campus,
will not own cars, the demand for parking will need to be reviewed accordingly. Details on
parking stall design will be provided as part of the General Plan of Development review.
Architectural Appearance. No building elevations have been submitted by the
applicant. Detailed building elevation plans will be required as part of the General Plan
of Development review. The City has requested that the structures in this general area be
Page 6
built of similar quality construction materials that were used for the Stillwater Area High
School.
Building Height. No building elevation plans have been received to date. It should be
noted that no structure in residential zones may exceed 35 feet in height unless by
conditional use permit according to the Zoning Ordinance.
Lighting. The applicant has not submitted a lighting plan. A photometric lighting plan
with specifications for all major lighting fixtures must be submitted as part of the General
Plan of Development application and shall be subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be
visible fro the public right -of -way or from adjacent properties in compliance with Section
401.15.B.7 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Landscaping. Landscaping plans have not been submitted to date but will be required
as part of the General Plan of Development. The City will require an evaluation of the
existing trees on the site, what will remain, what will be moved, and what will need to be
permanently removed. Preservation of the stands of mature trees, especially those on the
west end near Autumn Ridge and the existing Oak grove, south and east of the large
wetland complex, will be a high priority of the City. Screening and berming of existing
neighborhoods, especially the River Hills area and the Baytown Township neighborhoods,
will also be a priority in the landscape plans. For General Plan of Development, the
following will be required:
1. Analysis of existing tree inventory including identification of all trees over eight
inches in diameter (as measured 54 inches above ground).
2. An overall landscape plan indicating which existing trees will remain and what will
be removed. Details shall be provided including identification of all species,
numbers used, and size at time of planting.
3. Details shall be provided for landscaping around all buildings and in areas where
screening shall be required.
Signage. The plans to be submitted for the General Plan of Development will need to
provide signage detail. All signage and informational or visual communication devices
shall be in compliance with Section 401.15.G of the Zoning Ordinance.
Grading and Drainage. Grading and drainage information has been submitted. The
City Engineer has asked for additional information to be submitted at this time for a general
review of the drainage issues. A more complete report will be forthcoming from the City
Engineer. The drainage plan will be required to comply with the City Storm Water Plan,
subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and the Valley Branch Watershed
Page 7
A
District. All issues related to the general grading and drainage plan will need to be
resolved as part of the General Plan of Development submittal.
Utilities. A utility plan has been submitted. Said utility plan shall be subject to the
provisions of Section 401.06.B.10 of the Zoning Ordinance and review and approval of the
City Engineer.
Development Contract. The applicants will be required to enter into a development
contract with the City should approval of the Concept Plan and General Plan of
Development be granted. The development contact will specify the conditions of approval
and address the issues related to phasing the development.
RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION
Our office, having completed a through review of the submitted materials, finds that the
applicants' requested rezoning and Concept Plan proposal is generally acceptable and
appropriate for the subject site, as well as consistent with the City's Comprehensive Pan.
Issues which remain to be addressed as the process evolves from a Concept Plan to
General Plan of Development stage include detailed project plans such as site lighting,
landscaping, signage, architectural elements, etc. The rezoning to Planned Unit
Development will occur in conjunction with the General Plan of Development when all of
the issues in this report have been addressed.
The decision regarding the zoning designation of land within the City is a policy matter to
be decided by City officials. Based upon unique elements of the applicants' proposal and
the City's Comprehensive Plan, we believe that the requested rezoning is appropriate.
Should the City Council make a similar finding, our office recommends approval of the
following motion approving the submitted preliminary plat and Concept Plan.
The City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights hereby approves the PUD Concept Plan
for the VSSA Senior Life Community subject to the following conditions:
1. The Planning Commission and City Council should provide direction as to whether
this proposal is an appropriate land use for the site in question and whether the
new Comprehensive Plan should reflect that land use.
2. The area in question, to the south of 58th Street, is to be rezoned from 0, Open
Space Conservation to PUD, Planned Unit Development.
3. The applicants shall submit a preliminary plat for approval as part of the General
Plan of Development process.
Page 8
•
4. The Planning Commission and City Council provide direction as to the staff
comments on the general design of the VSSA project as found on pages 3/4 of this
planning report.
5. The Planning Commission, Park Commission, and City Council provide direction
as to the staff comments related to park dedication as found on page 5 of this
planning report.
ti 6. The applicants shall be required to pay all assessments for the construction of 58th
Street as well as area charges (sewer, water and storm water fees) at the time of
final plat approval.
7. The applicants shall provide accurate plans as part of the General Plan of
Development approval process to determine all interior and perimeter setbacks.
8. The City Engineer shall approve all curb cuts onto 58th Street related to this
development.
9. The Planning Commission and City Council shall comment on the outlot locations
planned for eventual connections between Phase II and roadways outside of the
VSSA development.
10. A traffic study will need to be submitted by the applicant as part of General Plan of
Development review. The traffic study shall be subject to review and approval of
the City Engineer.
11. The applicants shall submit detailed plans as part of the General Plan of
Development review related to off - street parking locations, design and number of
stalls.
12. Detailed building elevation plans and material samples for all proposed buildings
shall be required as part of General Plan of Development review.
13. The applicants shall submit a detailed lighting plan as part of General Plan of
Development review process.
14. The Planning Commission and City Council shall provide direction as to the staff
comments related to landscaping as found on page 7 of this planning report.
15. Signage details will need to be provided as part of General Plan of Development
review.
Page 9
16. A detailed grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted that complies with
the City's Storm Water Plan, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer
and the Valley Branch Watershed District. All issues related to the grading and
drainage plan will need to be resolved as part of the General Plan of Development
plan submittal.
17. The submitted utility plan is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
18. The applicants shall be required to enter into a development contract with the City
specifying the conditions of approval and address the issues related to phasing the
development.
Page 10
II1 .. •• rI;;•ii. I
Vlqgyq. s • J
__...
.1 ell go .-......7....TE-.... I 7.77:=IF:agiSti::F-Fr7 I .—...1
4
cl
TE
rc
la
rrE tel t //1 1 111 11 L
1 I 1 t f 0
111 I ii g i g ! 1 ili if
- ilk Off 1 iiiiiith i i go! 111 I
-s,
z
—I
IL
— - — _
111
1 ---
0 ' 16'
(-- ,==, 0.,
—,...- , ,_
,.,!..-:.08 „.:i
....t i /
1 I I: 0, =32 h.P ,.1.7.70:0 1 ILI
i ,
m o: g i ° ' ' , 1
1 •
0 •
) °". D 1 • 1, 1 \ I ln .
, 0 i
• d 0° . , 0_ , : il
1 , i
t ii • la #' r: i
i •• . ••,., .: c
& .._... co Ulli ftq 1
t., ,
CP A 40 & I EP
,,, ,' ...
' '/' . •? . c""r..1.1 - 0- 0 isi
i 3 ° — l' t•4 4 . il
c
l 61— - e 6 8 1 6 1
i 4 , ' • - c r- , -i•-9 . 11 ' . ------------- , ..,.... 0 .
_ 0.
. /.:,, ,..,
J .- • 4"A■t--...(‘ % ; , „ 0 " t 1 * 0 0
.
ro 11 :N:ii , 3 3 ( r ;) • ,, .. 0 4 0 0 0c. • ,, #
1 II II .:.'",, 0 . ,,,, .0 % 93 i ° •
"
. ■1,* ,
, , 0
•; an _ (3 ce c 0
,,I, • e , ..50 $is gi o •
g . „,,„ ,,, ...--,- --.."..."::. ° c . i i folip 0 , ° ------- - • 4 c p . .3 •4 8
.C. . • ° ° e o b 0 it 4. * ' e 0 er • ■•1 0 ,•:. 411
e C 0 .c.
• D4 ! 1 1 . • /---. ',,,,,, ,_cbr° . .
: cP cb ' ,:. P___ cO ,,, At • • .. V.ir . 0
• • , o 'Ir. d'' 0 0 0 6
, tD o ilill
• 0 1 %:•, to
P e a
• (0- .
c?1 * 0 . ,
• • 1- I - -I T s' ' L
— --- '',
0
_ ____ _
Y \ -
1 x ( 1 1 (I li' , — — ���
- ,),,,,.. j '')
l
11
�'�' ( r T � �
5 I I r
7? f f L � N
_r 1 L _S i
I,
K �
x
-i 6
to
i
j SENIOR LIFE COMMUNITY ULTEIG ENGINEERS, INC.
VALLEY SENIOR SERVICES ALLIANCE eau, Fasr HIV( R ROAN
CONCEPTUAL GRADING PI. AN SUIFF aoa I U
ANNNFASO/IS MINNESOTA
E
N 1 - F-a J C 1 1, I
r I] �( Il 1-.), ' 0 � ice, C : , r ,�
�s�
___.,--------
T , / i 'r l
� — --
"I
— -- �l
�� � � ��__
,
n�
1 ,. .
1 [, �' l )
Fr — 'i1 r I 1 ; j _ -,
- C ` L1f' i II1 _ I
m
CO I 1
- ---V,....._ _
n
SENIOR LIFE COMMUNITY ULTEIG ENGINEERS, INC. '
C) ; VALLEY SENIOR SERVICES ALLIANCE 52ol E AS, RIVER Roan I
MINNE 308
N CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN wxxEavou U ■
IS MINNESOTA sSazl 1
i r 1 ' -I .. HI , 1 _ -•. PHONE 06121 5JI -2500 Fa 1 1611 5 II6
1 I 1
i II 4
0
t
_ --I
.. _
4 Z ri
1 k
1 i
5 1
'
•Tf i
I 1
1
1 1
1
.
i lliP.
4601
6 1.1
.. 1. • ____ _ ___ •
, 4
, , 4
A .
il
li . ...._
117 is
, 1 tr" IF
m •:•.,
x ,--
To
0
., .-vrE .... rzrz. --
' ' "": FaF ' .27: r—
Erg
.,
. 7 ":"' ......... peld"
r • 1
•
..
r.::..7
, :. 111,•11111.—
. .
, t---.,---
1 ---- r —
+.:
---1__
411 6:Ipicarnit
A 1 1
...:.
IF
0 III T!
) i
r.,.r: •
.._
II LA
_ pi...i.
m .... .
lig Ind,—
r. , m : lEgli
A '
E A
I rn g
z 1
,-■ ._,1-
H '
OF LP,-.1
th
t "
1r
a 1 Ili -.4
• 2
° .
2".
„ 1
0
5 11
TA
g
1 _
I -7-4
A 0 _
EA 1 I I Z
in
4. ta NI CI -a
_ A
l a le!.
e GN
6
O.
_ is 11
- .
‚ii
g... —
X
X
011
.....
M
Th„,„ ,, „,„,,,, 1,,,,, — •....
tly.tp.: FiEdi....;:::::-.._ . ..
r 1 , 1 , ..„,.- vATTEr „ SEN■oR T.ERv.E5 ALT [..T.E
OAK PAK.. HEICK.175 I,H,501, KM ----- - MIN.N.ESOTA __
..• ;;;Ilrg m„.. .,, .-.:;: IN .11 el
S 111■
`J s h
O �
1 1:: N.1 °�
Q I - •
1
0 N � 3 N .• R!7, x Li
1 ` ;I 0
1 I
i
r„ F
Z
u D • _ I, •
W O LIN X
O corn
LX , u ii
Ez ;
� �
1 1 [V� 0 SM 1 7 - R _ -
J 1 ' 0 WI 0 - - - - - - °
o „I-
I �I
1 p i
--
� 0
1 I
1 „rl „ a.
II 1
11 • I. I!
a
57.0
b a PROPOSED MITY
/DOAD IKBf.1 wrt o • ,•,•
r
1.1 1 � J, I WREx FLOOR PLAN SENIOR LIFE LOMM VALLEY SENIOR SERVICES ALLIANCE
tan
_ I I tlINtlESQTe __ __ ~ I m la i t r !it N dN O Iu111 Q : ilr
l Y � OAK PARK NE16NT5, MINNESOTA - ` . oh II? h. YI . 61]11 •
° 10961. .� /1 11[ - iV 01
-i1
I
•111
a•1
I • a
a•
MIS
•
PATIO r j J E
T / s
QT____IX422 4 7 LIVING ROOM ku _ �, - - e
14.3 >� 13-0 . : .:
1. eo
iE
■
M5TR BEDROOM 1 a �
1 -0 X17-0
0 0 3;i ,
\ - , . r q�� uw DI NINGO �� T it - 1
I 0 4 X 10 -1 n �.�: i1
6EDROOM a3 )
10 -7 %10-4 1 0 . ,. ,. , ,. ,. , . O ' i.5 1 i
a 10 , r ' k 01 '`° '
i
0 II I 44 KITCHEN. O O . .J 1 f
10. 6X11 -6� QO
i
,
BEDROOM •2 1 " 1 "I 13 ® ow 5114K I - ��
L p' _
A,,,. d
PORTICO
1(‘ i,,,A J ; i 1 ,
00
GARAGE -
w -3 X 21-I
I
3 BEDROOM UNIT — SENIOR HOUSING
I/4 " =1 -O" 1442 50. FT, !
.
4
• ?�,': NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: 24 June 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Valley Senior Services Alliance:
Park Dedication
FILE NO: 798.04 - 98.09
For your information, I have recalculated the park dedication requirements based upon the
revised number of units /beds for the proposed Oak Park Heights VSSA campus. Barbara
Barry provided a revised Development Program for the project with the new unit numbers
as follows:
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Phase I
Independent Living Apartments 90 units
Alzheimer Assisted Living 36 units
Assisted Living 126 units
Duplexes 42 units
Central Dietary /Kitchen and Laundry
Office Building 75,000 sq.ft.
Phase II
Independent Living Cooperative 90 units
Skilled Nursing 68 units
Duplexes 60 units
Quads 16 units
Single Unit Cottages 32 units
5775 `NAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2- 595 -9636 FAX 6 1 2- 595 -9837 E -MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
•
S
Based upon the program listed above, our office has calculated the following park land
dedication:
USSA - OAK PARK HEIGHTS SENIOR CAMPUS /PARK DEDICATION
Units Beds Park
• Dedication
Phase I
Independent Living Apartments 90 117 1.56 acres
Assisted Living / Alzheimer 162 178 2.37 acres
Duplexes 42 84 1.12 acres
Phase II
Independent Living Cooperative 90 158 2.11 acres
Skilled Nursing 68 68 0.91 acres
Duplexes 60 120 1.60 acres
Quads 16 32 0.43 acres
Single Unit Cottages 32 64 0.85 acres
TOTAL 560 821 10.95 acres
The land dedication requirement under the current VSSA Development Program is 10.95
acres. This does not include the acreage occupied by the central facility /office building
or the acreage that would be purchased by VSSA, but included in the commercial
development north of 58th Street. The Subdivision Regulations indicate that
commercial /industrial park land dedication would be in the form of a cash dedication
equaling $1,750.00 per acre.
The Park Board will meet on 30 June 1998 and should discuss the park
dedication /planning issues for the VSSA development.
pc: Mark Vierling
Skip Sorensen
Barbara Barry
2
ENCLOSURE 4
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
POSSIBLE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CENTRAL
BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONE
The Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights will hold a Public Hearing on
Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. at Oak Park Heights City Hall at 14168 North 57th Street
to discuss the possible establishment of a Central Business District Zone.
All who wish to comment are asked to attend and be heard.
Date: June 30, 1998
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Thomas M. Melena
City Administrator
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
N INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
ENCLOSURE 5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Brad Digre / Scott Richards
DATE: 7 July 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Zoning Ordinance Revision: Central Business
District - Planning Commission Amendments
FILE NO: 798.04 - 98.10
Attached is a draft of the Ordinance to allow the formation of a Central Business District
in Oak Park Heights. Also included are the amended sections of the ordinance that must
include reference to the CBD such as lot sizes, area and setback requirements, and sign
requirements. For your reference, those sections that are underlined include new
language and language that is Tined out is to be removed.
Based on our meeting with the Planning Commission on Thursday, June 18, several
sections of the Ordinance have been amended. The recent changes to the CBD district
are as follows:
PERMITTED USES. A minor change was made to add convenience food establishments
without drive -in facilities to the CBD permitted uses.
CONDITIONAL USES. The language allowing open and outdoor storage as an accessory
use was entirely removed. Open or outdoor service, was amended so as not to allow sale
and rental as an accessory use for new or used automotive, truck, motorcycle or trailer
rental or sales lots.
BUILDING TYPE AND CONSTRUCTION. The proposed section to include the CBD with
B -1 and B -2 Zoning Districts in regards to building type and construction was removed.
SIGNS - DISTRICT REGULATIONS. A new section specific to the CBD was added to
reference changes in the number and size of signs referenced in the sign tables.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2- 595 -9636 FAX 6 1 2- 595 -9837 E -MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
We suggest the Planning Commission review the text amendments and consider the
rezoning of property as included in the attached map. The area to be rezoned is all of the
property included in the Town Center concept for development of a Central Business
District. If the Planning Commission is comfortable with the text and area to be rezoned,
a recommendation can be made at the 16 July 1998 meeting.
2
DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 98-
AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 401.301 TO ALLOW A CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT ZONE AND AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE TO
INCLUDE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT USES.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 401.301, CBD Central Business District, is hereby added with the
following stipulations:
401.301.A. PURPOSE: The CBD District is intended to provide a district accommodating
those retail sales, service and office functions which are characteristic to a "downtown"
area and to allow a downtown area to expand, develop and redevelop while maintaining
the desired character.
401.301.B. PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in a CBD District:
1. Banks, savings institutions, credit unions and other financial institutions.
2. Business, commercial, or trade schools.
3. Clinics, for people only.
4. Day care - group nursery (within single occupancy freestanding building).
5. Government and public utility buildings.
6. Motels, motor hotels and hotels.
7. Restaurants, cafes, tea rooms, taverns, off -sale liquor and convenience food
establishments without a drive -in facility.
8. Retail sales.
9. CommerciaLser_vice_ I,sPs.
10. Commercial recreation.
e
11. Libraries.
12. Offices, business or professional, including ticket sales.
13. Theaters, excluding drive -in type of service.
14. Club or lodge halls serving food and beverage.
15. Parking or garages, other than those accessory to a principle use, for the parking
and storage of private passenger vehicles only.
16. Rental services conducted entirely within a building.
17. Artistic and handicraft uses such as artists studios, ceramic shop, pottery works,
candle making, Tight metal working, provided at least twenty -five (25) percent of the
total floor space at the front of the building on the street level is used for sales and
display purposes.
18. Dwelling units located above street level in non - residential structures.
401.301.C. INTERIM USES: The following are interim uses in a CBD District:
None
401.301.D. ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted accessory uses in a CBD
District:
1. Off - street parking as regulated by Section 401.15.F of this Ordinance, but not
including semi - trailer trucks.
2. Off- street loading as regulated by Section 401.15.F of this Ordinance.
3. Radio and television receiving antennas including single satellite dish TVROs two
(2) meters or less in diameter, short-wave radio dispatching antennas, or those
necessary for the operation of household electronic equipment including radio
receivers, federally licensed amateur radio stations and television receivers, as
regulated in Section 401.15.P of this Ordinance.
2
401.301.E. CONDITIONAL USES. The following are conditional uses in a CBD District:
(Requires a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by
Section 401.03 of this Ordinance).
1. Custom manufacturing, restricted production and repair limited to the following:
watches, dentures, optical lenses and medical supplies, provided that:
a. Such use is accessory as defined by Section 401.02.B. of this Ordinance to
the principal use of the property.
b. Does not conflict with the character of development intended for this district.
c. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8. of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
2. Open or outdoor service, sale and rental as an accessory use, but not including
new or used automotive, truck, motorcycle or trailer rental or sales Tots, provided
that:
a. Outside service, sales and equipment rental connected with the principal use
is limited to thirty (30) percent of the gross floor area of the principal use.
b. Outside sales areas are fenced or screened from view of neighboring
residential uses or an abutting residential district in compliance with Section
401.15.E. of this Ordinance.
c. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the Tight source shall not be
visible from the public right -of -way or from neighboring residences and shall
be in compliance with Section 401.15.B.7. of this Ordinance.
d. Sales area is grassed or surfaced to control dust.
e. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
3. Commercial planned unit development as regulated by Section 401.06 of this
Ordinance.
3
4. Day care - group nursery (within multiple occupancy building) provided that:
a. Use Compatibility. The operation and function of the day care facility must
be compatible with other existing uses within the building. This compatibility
is to be based upon the nature of the day care use in relation to the
operation of the other existing uses within the building and the satisfactory
resolution of conditions (b -g) of this Ordinance.
b. Building Plans. The buildingplans for the construction or alteration of a
structure that is to be used for a day care facility shall be submitted to the
City for review by the City Building Official to determine compliance with the
State Building Code. The facility shall also meet the following conditions:
'11 The architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and
site shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to
cause impairment of property values or constitute a blighting_
influence within a residential distance of the lot.
21 The day care facility shall be located in a portion of the building
separated from the other uses located within the structure.
The day care facility shall be adequately sound - proofed to remove
extraneous noise that would interfere with the day care operation and
would affect the health, safety and welfare of the day care
participants. Adequate sound - proofing must also be provided to
prevent disruptive noise generated by the day care facility from
interfering with the operation of the adjacent uses within the building.
4 Internal and external site land use compatibility and sufficient
peripheral area protection shall be provided by the day care facility.
c. Screening. Where any outdoor recreational or play area for the day care
facility abuts any commercial or industrial use or zoned property, the play
area shall be screened along all exposed perimeters. All of the required
fencing and screening shall comply with the fencing and screening
requirements in Section 401.15.E. of this Ordinance.
d. Parking. When a day care facility is within a structure containing another
principal use, each use shall be calculated separately for determining the
total off - street parking spaces required.
e. Loading. One (1) off - street loading space in compliance with Section
401.15.F. of this Ordinance shall be provided.
4
f. Signage. All signing and informational or visual communication devices
shall be in compliance with Section 401.15.G. of this Ordinance.
c Conditional Use and State Regulations. Day care group nursery facilities
shall be subject to the regulations and procedures of Section 401.03 of this
Ordinance and the minimum licensing requirements, as may be amended,
of the Minnesota Department of Human Services.
5. Cellular telephone antennas not located on a public structure, provide that:
a. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8. and Section 401.15.P. of this
Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily.
6. Two family, townhomes and multiple family dwellings, provided that:
a. At least two parking spaces per unit must be provided on site, or proof is
shown of arrangements for private parking nearby.
b. No physical improvements, either interior or exterior, may preclude future re-
use for commercial purposes.
c. Unit floor areas must comply with Section 401.15.C.6.
d. Compliance with conditional use requirements of Section 401.03.A.8.
e. The development does not conflict with existing or potential future
commercial uses and activities
f. The density standards imposed as part of the R -3 Zoning District are
complied with.
9_ Adequate open space and recreational space is provided on site for the
benefit of the occupants.
h. The development does not conflict or result in incompatible land use
arrangements as related to abutting residential uses or commercial uses.
Residential use be governed by all applicable standards of the Zoning_
Ordinance, Building Code, Housing Code and Fire Codes.
Residential and non - residential uses shall not be contained on the same
floor.
5
k. Residential uses shall be provided with a separate entrance, and separately
identified parking stalls.
7. Buildings in excess of three (3) stories or thirty -five (35) feet, provided that:
a. The site is capable of accommodating the increased intensity of use.
b. The increased intensity of use does not cause an increase in traffic volumes
beyond the capacity of the surrounding streets.
c. Public utilities and services are adequate.
d. For each additional story over three (3) stories or for each additional ten (10)
feet above thirty -five (35) feet, front and side yard setback requirements
shall be increased five (5) feet, except for elderly public housing.
e. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8. of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
Section 2. Section 401.06. B.14.a.5., Non Residential Project Standards for Planned Unit
Developments, is hereby amended to add the following:
5) For non - residential PUD District projects, the normal standards of
either the R -B, B -1, B -2, CBD. B -W and I zoning classifications shall
apply to each project, excepting usage standards, as determined by
the City Council and as provided above in Section 401.06.B.
Section 3. Section 401.08.D., Development Review under the Section concerning
Administration - Fees is hereby amended to add the following:
401.08.D. Development Review. In all R -3, R -B, B -1, B -2, CBD, B -W, I and River
Impact District zones, all applications for building permits relating to multiple family
housing, industrial, commercial or retail uses of property within those zones shall first be
referred to the City Planner to determine zoning code compliance prior to review of the
proposed development by the building inspector and prior to issuance of a building permit.
All expenses incurred by the City in reviewing applications for industrial, commercial or
retail buildings or uses within those zones shall be paid by the applicant to the City. The
City Council may, by resolution, from time to time implement a procedure affecting the
payment of such expenses to the City of Oak Park Heights by all such applicants.
6
Section 4. Section 401.15.C.1.d., Yard Requirements within the General Yard, Lot Area,
and Building Regulations section is hereby amended to add the following:
d. All setback distances, as listed in the table below, shall be measured from
the appropriate lot line.
District Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard
0 50 feet 30 feet 50 feet
R -1 30 feet' 10 feet 30 feet
R-1A 30 feet' 10 feet 30 feet
R -1 B 30 feet' 10 feet 30 feet
R -1 C 30 feet' 15 feet 30 feet
R -2 30 feet' 10 feet 30 feet
R -3 30 feet 20 feet 30 feet
R -B 30 feet 10 feet 30 feet
B -1 30 feet 20 feet 30 feet
B -2 40 feet 10 feet 20 feet
CBD No minimum No minimum No minimum
B -W 50 feet 20 feet 20 feet
I 50 feet 30 feet 40 feet
' Where adjacent structures within same block have front yard setbacks
different from those required, the front yard minimum setback shall be the
average of the adjacent structures. If there is only one (1) adjacent
structure, the front yard minimum setback shall be the average of the
required setback and the setback of adjacent structures.
2 Not less than thirty (30) feet from lot line, if lot is on a corner.
3 Not less than twenty (20) feet from lot line, if lot is on a corner.
4 Not less than fifty (50) feet from a lot if lot abuts a residential zoning district.
7
f
There shall be no front yard, exterior side yard or rear yard requirements,
except that there shall be a required setback within CBD District boundaries
when such boundaries are adjacent to a residential district. In such cases,
the setback shall be the same as the setback for the adjacent district.
There shall be no interior side yard required in the CBD District, except that
in such cases where a side yard is provided it shall be a minimum of five (5)
feet in width.
Section 5. Section 401.15.C.2., Area and Building Size Regulations within the General
Yard, Lot Area, and Building Regulations section is hereby amended to add the following:
2 Area and Building Size Regulations. This section identifies minimum area and
building size requirements to be provided for in each zoning district as listed in the
table below:
District Lot Area Lot Width Building Height
0 5 acres 200 feet 35 feet
R -1 10,400 SF 80 feet 35 feet
R-1A 12,500 SF 85 feet 35 feet
R -1 B 15,000 SF 90 feet 35 feet
R-1C 20,000 SF 100 feet 35 feet
R -2 10,400 SF 80 feet 35 feet
R -3 15,000 SF 100 feet 35 feet
R -B 15,000 SF 100 feet 35 feet
B -1 15,000 SF 100 feet 35 feet
B -2 15,000 SF 100 feet 35 feet
CBD No minimum No minimum 35 feet
B -W 30,000 SF 100 feet 35 feet
1 acre 100 feet 45 feet
8
Section 6. Section 401.15.G.5.g., General Provisions within the Signs section is hereby
amended to add the following:
g. The temporary use of searchlights, banners, pennants and similar devices
shall require a permit. The permit shall be valid for ten (10) consecutive
days. No more than three (3) permits per business proprietor shall be
granted during any 12 -month period and no permit shall be issued within
thirty (30) days of the expiration of a previous permit. The permit shall be
promptly displayed during the period of validity. Notwithstanding the above,
no such permits shall be issued except in R -B, B -2, CBD, B -W, and I
Districts of the City.
Section 7. Section 401.15.G.6.a.8.b., Permitted and Prohibited Signs within the Signs
section is hereby amended to add the following:
b) Signs may not measure more than twelve (12) square feet in
0 Districts; not more than four (4) square feet in R -1, R -2
Districts; not more than thirty -two (32) square feet in R -3, R -B,
B -1, B -2, CBD, B -W, and I Districts
Section 8. Section 401.15.G.6.a.10., Permitted and Prohibited Signs within the Signs
section is hereby amended to add the following:
10) Temporary Window Signs. Temporary window signs shall be
permitted within the R -B, B -1 ate B -2 and CBD zoning districts,
provided that they do not exceed ten percent (10 %) of the front
building facade.
Section 9. Section 401.15.G.8.e., is hereby added with the following stipulations:
e. CBD, Central Business District. Only two (2) signs per principal use, except
on corner lots which may have two (2) wall signs, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Only one (1) freestanding monument sign will be permitted with a
maximum of forty (40) square feet and a height of eight (8) feet.
9
2. Only one (1) sign on wall, canopy or marquee will be permitted, with
a maximum area of one hundred (100) square feet or ten (10) percent
of the front building facade, whichever of the two is less. Signage
consisting of individually outlined alphabetic, numeric and symbolic
characters without background except that provided by the building
surface, may be increased by the building surface, may be increased
by twenty -five (25) percent of the allowable sign area provided it does
not exceed one hundred (100) square feet. An individual sign may
not exceed the height of the parapet wall or eave.
3. On a corner lot, each facade facing a public right -of -way may have
one wall sign. Both the front and side facade may be counted when
determining sign area. Total are of both signs shall not exceed the
requirements established in provision (2) above.
Section 10. Section 401.15.G.8.d.3., "Sign Type and Maximum Gross Surface Area in
Square Feet" and "Sign Type and Maximum Height in Feet" tables within the Signs section
are hereby amended to add the following:
SIGN TYPE AND MAXIMUM GROSS
SURFACE AREA IN SQUARE FEET
Zoning Free- Identi- Canopy Temp Perm Address Direction Political Con- Property Motor
District standing fication Marquee Window Window struction Sale or Fuel
Wall Rental Station
Price
Display
0 24 2 24 -- 25 %* 2 4 4 32 12 –
R-1/R-2 40 2 18 -- 25 %* 2 4 4 32 4 --
R3 – 2 – -- 25 %* 2 4 4 50 32 --
R-B 40 2 40 10 % ** 25 %* 2 4 4 50 32 –
B -1 40 2 40 10 % ** 25 %* 2 4 -- 50 32 –
B -2 150 — 2 150 * ** 10 % ** 25 %* 2 4 -- 50 32 16
CBD 40 2 100 * * ** 10 % ** 25 %* 2 4 -- 50 32 --
BW – 2 -- -- 25 %* 2 4 -- 50 – –
I 150 * ** 2 150 * ** -- 25 %* 2 4 – 50 32 --
*Percentage based upon total window area
*"Percentage based upon front building facade
***150 square feet or 15% of front building facade whichever is less
"**"100 square feet or 10% of front building facade whichever is less
10
SIGN TYPE AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN FEET
Zoning Freestand- Identifica- Canopy, Marquee, Wall Address Motor Fuel
District ing tion Station -Price
Display
0 8 feet 5 feet Top of parapet wall or eave 3.5 inches --
R-1/R-2 6 feet 5 feet Top of parapet wall or eave 3.5 inches --
R-3 -- 5 feet -- 3.5 inches --
R-B 8 feet 5 feet Top of parapet wall or eave 3.5 inches --
B-1 8 feet 5 feet Top of parapet wall or eave 3.5 inches --
B-2 30 feet 5 feet Top of parapet wall or eave 3.5 inches 8 feet
CBD -- 5 feet Top of parapet wall or eave 3.5 inches --
BW -- 5 feet -- 3.5 inches --
I 30 feet 5 feet Top of parapet wall or eave 3.5 inches --
Section 11. Section 401.20.A.2.c., Business Districts within the Establishment of Districts
section is hereby amended to add the following:
c. CBD Central Business District
Section 12. Section 401.20.A.2.d., Business Districts within the Establishment of Districts
section is hereby amended to add the following:
d. B -W Business/Warehousing
11
Section 13. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and
publication.
PASSED this day of 1998.
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
By:
David Schaaf, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Tom Melena, City Administrator
12
_7 OAK PARK HEIGHTS ► w
7 7 / Proposed CBD t � 1M11-
„4,)- , in
1
, ,.
1
,. , ___ __ )( , f #
z : V a t s y a + [ T1 , 0 0 is -'t�� /� '�1t a
a.. (` C am ' § J *';,K' :,,,
.
— Mil 10.0".
t r MAO
c �, ! , ,P,, � '•, ■• • \‘411,.. `_ ■-I = 111,"1 ... IN
x it .,. '
l U! ___ MI �4diiiWF
1
4 Re 11 :iv
� a111 M1i.
ER mil 11111111E N o Igo/ 111111
1iAIIII._sill
0 City Limit '
ma I ■ 161
■ z=
J Q Proposed Central Business District — — -_ •
Zoning ��� �� moo i
[ j R -1, Single Family Residential 1111111•11 ill -
IL j R -2, Low & Medium Density Residential A -_ II N
—
R -3, Multiple Family Residential ` , O11
/ / / / /,; R -B, Residential / Business Transitional pilill ∎�� N VIII
[ ------ 1 B -2, General Business ) \ �
I, Industrial 4 < � _� /„ N
di - 0, Open Space Conservation / t ,
L ' PUD, Planned Unit Development j /
\\, )1 A
Annexation s \ \ 1 I I \ �''
1 1111 Waterbodies � v
0.06 0 0.06 0.12 0.18 0.24
0.3 Miles J
N
• wir .....
CITY OF ENCLOSURE 6
OAK PARK HEIGHTS
14168 N. 57th Street • Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 •Phone: (612) 439 -4439 FAX 439 -0574
•
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
POSSIBLE REZONING OF PROPERTY
IN THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
The Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights will hold a Public Hearing on
Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. at Oak Park Heights City Hall at 14168 North 57th Street
to discuss the possible rezoning of property in lower Oak Park Heights from R -2 to 0-Open
Space.
All who wish to comment are asked to attend and be heard.
Date: June 30, 1998
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Thomas M. Melena
City Administrator
Tree City U.S.A.
a
sw i
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
INC N COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
ENCLOSURE 7 a
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Brad Digre / Scott Richards
DATE: 7 July 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Lower Oak Park Heights Rezoning
FILE NO: 798.04 - 98.12
As you are aware, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) has acquired
properties in the Lower Oak Park Heights neighborhood (see Attachment). These
properties were purchased for the St. Croix River Bridge construction area. All but
three of the homes that were located there have been removed.
The property is currently zoned R -2, Low & Medium Density Residential. The purpose
of the R -2 District is to provide for low to moderate density residential dwellings and
directly related, complementary uses. For a list of uses see Attachment.
At the direction of the City Council we have prepared a map delineating the boundary
of the area being proposed for rezoning to 0, Open Space (see Attachment). The
reason for the zoning change is to limit the reuse of the properties in the event they are
sold by MNDOT.
The Open Space designation will provide a more restrictive level of control. It is
intended to provide a district which will allow suitable areas of the City to be retained
and utilized for new low density residential, non -local jurisdiction public uses, open
space, agricultural uses and provide a "holding" zone for newly annexed lands to
ensure that development will be staged to maintain reasonable economy in public
expenditures for public utilities and service. For a list of uses see Attachment.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2- 595 -9636 FAX 6 1 2- 595 -9837 E -MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
t .
A public hearing is scheduled for the 16 July 1998 Planning Commission meeting to
consider the rezoning and take public comment.
Attachments:
-Map depicting current zoning, MNDOT acquired properties and
the proposed boundary for rezoning.
- Zoning Ordinance Section 401.26; R -2, Low and Medium Density
Residential District.
- Zoning Ordinance Section 401.21; 0, Open Space Conservation
District.
2
S
401.26. R -2, LOW AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
401.26.A. Purpose. The purpose of the R -2, Low and Medium Density Residential
District is to provide for low to moderate density residential dwellings and directly related,
complementary uses.
401.26.B. Permitted Uses. The following are permitted uses in an R -2 District:
1. All permitted uses allowed in an R -1 District.
2. Two family dwelling units.
401.26.C. Interim Uses. The following are interim uses in an R -2 District:
1. None.
401.26.D. Accessory Uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in an R -2
District:
1. All accessory uses as allowed in an R -1 District.
401.26.E. Conditional Uses. The following are conditional uses in an R -2 District:
(Requires a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by
Section 401.03 of this Ordinance.)
1. All conditional uses, subject to the same conditions as allowed in an R -1 District.
*2. Townhouses, quadraminiums, cooperatives and condominiums as defined in
Section 401.02.B. of this Ordinance.
3. Multiple family dwelling structures of not more than four (4) units, provided that:
a. The proposed site contains at least three thousand five hundred (3,500)
square feet per dwelling unit.
b. The proposed site is located adjacent to a collector or minor arterial street.
* Amended Ord. No. 97- 401.02, October 14, 1997
26 -1
c. At least one (1) garage space is provided for each dwelling unit.
d. The proposed site is landscaped and screened with planting materials in
compliance with Section 401.15.E. of this Ordinance.
e. The proposed structure design is reasonably compatible with its low density
residential environment, as determined by the City Council.
`f. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8. of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
5. Bed and breakfast facilities providing that the following criteria are met:
a. A maximum of four (4) bed and breakfast units may be established within a
structure.
b. The facility shall have a State license (hotel and food), and comply with all
health, safety, building and fire codes as may be required or applicable.
c. Facilities shall be owner or manager occupied at all times when guests are
present.
d. The principal structure shall have a minimum size of one thousand seven
hundred fifty (1,750) gross square feet and shall be located on a lot which
meets the minimum dimensional lot requirements of the district in which it is
located.
e. All bed and breakfast units shall be established within the principal structure.
f. Not more than the equivalent of one (1) full -time person shall be employed
by the bed and breakfast facility who is not a resident of the structure.
g. Dining and other facilities shall not be opened to the public, but shall be
used exclusively by the registered guests and residents.
h. Two (2) off - street parking spaces shall be provided for the home plus one (1)
space for each bed and breakfast unit. Parking areas shall be screened and
landscaped and no parking space shall be located in the front yard area of
the property.
Amended Ord. No. 97- 401.02, October 14, 1997
26 -2
Not more than one identification sign not exceeding six (6) square feet in
area may be located on the premises. The sign shall be reflective of the
architectural features in the structure and may not be externally or internally
illuminated.
j. Adequate lighting shall be provided between the principal structure and the
parking area for the safety of guests. All external lighting shall be regulated
by conditional use permit.
*6. Manufactured Housing Parks. Manufactured housing parks including
manufactured single family housing units, offices limited to the administration of the
park, recreational buildings and structures, storm shelters, and other directly related
complementary uses, provided that:
a. General Provisions for all Manufactured Home Parks.
1) Area. All land area shall be:
a) Adequately drained.
b) Landscaped to control dust.
c) Clean and free from refuse, garbage, rubbish or debris.
2) Outdoor Camping. There shall not be outdoor camping anywhere in
a manufactured home park.
3) Public Access. Public access to manufactured housing parks shall
be as approved by the City.
4) Building Permit. All structures (fences, storage, decks, etc.) shall
require a building permit from the Building Official. Fences shall be
prohibited on individual manufactured home lots.
5) Foundation Enclosure. The area beneath a manufactured home
shall be enclosed except that such enclosure must have access for
inspection.
6) Community Building /Emergency Storm Shelter. A manufactured
home park shall have an adequate central community building and
storm shelter. Such building must be constructed in conformance
with Chapter 1370, Department of Administration, Minnesota State
*Amended Ord. 98- 401 -02, 12 May 1998
26 -3
Building Code requirements for storm shelters and be provided with
rest room facilities, have adequate heating in all areas, and be
maintained in a safe, clean and sanitary condition. Additionally, all
emergency storm protection measures shall be subject to the
approval of the City Council.
7) • Lot Setbacks. Individual manufactured home lot setbacks:
a) No manufactured home shall be located closer than ten (10)
feet to a side or rear lot line. The front yard setback shall be
at least thirty (30) feet from the street surface. On corner Tots,
the side yard setback shall be at least twenty (20) feet from the
street surface. No manufactured home shall be located closer
than thirty (30) feet from the periphery lot line of the
manufactured home park.
8) Permitted Encroachments.
a) Attached steps, uncovered stoops, and landings may encroach
up to five (5) feet into a side yard setback, provided that they
do not exceed twenty (20) square feet in area or extend closer
than ten (10) feet to a structure on an adjacent lot.
b) An eave or overhang may encroach up to one (1) foot into a
front, side and rear setback.
9) Building Height Requirements. No structure shall exceed one (1)
story or twenty -five (25) feet, whichever is least.
10) Utilities.
a) All manufactured home parks shall be connected to a public
water and sanitary sewer system.
b) All installations for disposal of surface storm water must be
approved by the City and applicable watershed district.
c) All utility connections shall be as approved by the City.
d) All utilities shall be underground. There shall be no overhead
wires or supporting poles except those essential for street or
other lighting purposes.
26 -4
e) No obstruction shall be permitted that impedes the inspection
plumbing, electrical facilities, and related manufactured home
equipment.
f) The method of garbage, waste, and trash disposal must be
approved by the City.
g) The owner shall pay any required sewer and water connection
fees to the City.
h) The owner shall pay inspection and testing fees for utility
services to the City.
11) Storage. Exterior storage on individual manufactured home lots shall
comply with the provisions of Section 401.15 of this Chapter, except
not more than one (1) recreational vehicle may be allowed on a lot.
12) Accessory Buildings.
a) Except as specifically regulated by this Section, all accessory
buildings shall meet the applicable requirements of Section
401.15 D of this Chapter.
b) Limit. Accessory buildings including garages shall be limited
to one (1) per manufactured home lot. Maximum allowable
floor area shall not exceed six (6) percent of the lot size in
manufactured home parks where lot size is delineated by site
plan or lot markers.
c) Maximum Building Height. Fifteen (15) feet.
d) Location. The manufactured home park site plan shall
designate the locations proposed for the development of
garages and/or accessory buildings on each manufactured
home. Said accessory buildings shall comply with the
following setback requirements:
An accessory building shall only be located in side or
rear yards.
ii. Accessory buildings shall not be located within any
utility easements.
26 -5
iii. All accessory buildings located on individual
manufactured home unit lots shall be owned,
constructed, and maintained by the manufactured home
park owner. All accessory structures shall be
established as part of a predetermined site plan and
subject to the approval of the City Council.
• e) Building Type and Construction. Any building addition shall
either be manufactured or custom built of materials that are
consistent or compatible to the design of the principal building.
"Compatible" means that the exterior appearance of an
accessory building is not at variance with the principal building
from an aesthetic and architectural standpoint to cause:
A difference to a degree to cause incongruity with the
principal building.
ii. A deviation from the general character of the
neighborhood.
iii. A depreciation of neighborhood values or adjacent
property values.
iv. A nuisance. Types of nuisance characteristics include,
but are not limited to, noise, dust, odors, glare and
unsightly building exterior.
b. Design Requirements for Manufactured Home Parks.
1) Park Size. The minimum area required for a manufactured home
park designation shall be twenty (20) acres.
2) Lot Size. Individual manufactured home lots:
a) Lot Area. Not less than twelve thousand (12,000) square feet.
b) Lot Width. Not less than eighty (80) feet.
c) Lot Depth. Not less than one hundred (100) feet.
d) Each manufactured home lot shall have frontage on an
approved roadway and the corners of each manufactured
home lot shall be marked and each lot shall be numbered.
26 -6
3) Parking.
a) Each manufactured home site shall have off - street parking
space for two (2) passenger vehicles.
b) All parking spaces shall be hard surfaced according to
specifications established by the City.
4) Internal Roads and Streets.
a) All streets shall be private streets and shall be developed with
a road bed of not Tess than thirty -two (32) feet in width and
shall meet City design specifications. Street plans shall be
subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. A
reduction in the street width requirement may be allowed by
conditional use permit as regulated by Section 401.03 of this
Chapter provided sufficient off - street guest parking spaces, as
determined by the City, are constructed and maintained at the
owner /operator's expense.
b) The park shall have a street lighting plan approved by the City.
5) Recreation. All manufactured home parks shall have at least ten
(10) percent of the land area developed for recreational use (tennis
courts, children's play equipment), swimming pool, golf green, etc.).
The recreational use shall be developed and maintained at the
owner /operator's expense.
6) Landscaping.
a) Each manufactured home lot shall be provided with two (2)
trees. The size and type of trees must meet the requirements
of Section 401.15.E of this Chapter.
b) A landscape screen meeting the requirements of Section
401.15.E of this Chapter shall be installed and maintained
around each manufactured home park.
c) All areas shall be landscaped in accordance with a
landscaping plan approved by the City Council.
26 -7
7) Lighting.
a) Artificial light shall be maintained during all hours of darkness
in all buildings containing public toilets, laundry equipment,
and the like.
•
b) The manufactured home park grounds shall be lighted as
approved by the City from sunset to sunrise.
c) All lighting within the manufactured home park grounds shall
be subject to the requirements of Section 401.15.B.7 of this
Chapter.
c. Operational Standards for Manufactured Home Park.
1) Maintenance. The operator of any manufactured home park, or a
duly authorized attendance and /or caretaker shall be responsible at
all times for keeping the manufactured home park, its facilities and
equipment, in a clean, orderly, operable, and sanitary condition. The
attendant or caretaker shall be answerable, along with said operator,
for the violation of any provisions of these regulations to which said
operator is subject.
2) Inspection Prior to Sale. Prior to the sale of a manufactured home
within a manufactured home park, the operator of a manufactured
home park or the duly authorized attendant and /or caretaker must
inform the Building Official of the prospective sale and provide him
with a completed copy of the Manufactured Home Safety Disclosure
Form required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 327.07, Subdivision
3A.
3) Permits. Prior to a manufactured home being moved into a lot, the
owner shall apply for and obtain a building permit for the (foundation)
blocking to State Code and a permit for connection to public sewer
and water. The application for permits shall be accompanied by a
site plan, drawn to scale, detailing the unit placement, accessory
structures, and setbacks.
4) Upgrading. Prior to locating a manufactured home housing unit
constructed prior to 1 July 1972. on a lot within a manufactured home
park within the City, said unit shall be upgraded to current life safety
codes and subject to the approval of the Buildino Official.
26 -8
d. Maintenance. All private internal streets in manufactured home parks shall
be maintained by the park owner in a good state of repair, free from
obstructions, encumbrances, depressions, pot holes, and break ups. Snow
shall be promptly plowed and removed from streets and adjacent mail boxes
and fire hydrants, so that snow or snow piles do not constitute a safety
hazard to motorists and pedestrians, or constitute an obstruction to
emergency service vehicles. Icy streets and areas adjacent to mail boxes
shall be promptly sanded. "Promptly" shall mean no later than twenty -four
(24) hours after the end of a snow fall or in the case of ice within twenty -four
(24) hours after it was formed.
26 -9
401.21. 0, OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION DISTRICT
401.21.A. Purpose. The 0, Open Space Conservation District is intended to provide
a district which will allow suitable areas of the City to be retained and utilized for new low
density residential, non -local jurisdiction public uses, open space, agricultural uses and
provide a "holding" zone for newly annexed lands to ensure that development will be
staged to maintain reasonable economy in public expenditures for public utilities and
service.
401.21.B. Permitted Uses. The following are permitted uses in an 0 District:
1. Farming and agricultural related buildings and structures subject to Minnesota
Pollution Control Standards, but not including commercial feedlots or other
commercial operations.
2. City parks and recreational areas.
3. Nurseries, tree farms and greenhouses all for the growing of plants, but not to
include retail sales.
4. Single family dwellings.
5. Essential services.
6. Day care facilities serving twelve (12) or fewer persons.
7. Residential care facilities serving six (6) or fewer persons.
8. Cellular telephone antennas located on a public structure as regulated in Section
401.15.P. of this Ordinance.
401.21.C. Interim Uses. The following are interim uses in an 0 District:
1. None.
21 -1
401.21.D. Accessory Uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in an
District:
1. Operation and storage of such vehicles, equipment and machinery which are
incidental to permitted or conditional uses allowed in this district.
2. Not more than four (4) boarders and /or roomers by a resident family.
3. Living quarters of persons employed on the premises.
4. Home occupations.
5. Recreational vehicles and equipment.
6. Swimming pool, tennis courts and other recreational facilities which are operated
for the enjoyment and convenience of the residents of the principal use and their
guests, when fully in compliance with all applicable State standards.
7. Tool houses, sheds and similar buildings for storage of domestic supplies and non-
commercial recreational equipment.
8. Private garages, parking spaces and carports for licensed and operable passenger
cars and trucks.
9. Radio and television antennas including single satellite dish TVROs one (1) meter
or less in diameter, short-wave radio dispatching antennas, or those necessary for
the operation of household electronic equipment including radio receivers, federally
licensed amateur radio stations and television receivers, as regulated in Section
401.15.P of this Ordinance.
401.21.E. Conditional Uses. The following are conditional uses in an 0 District:
(Requires a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by
Section 401.03 of this Ordinance.)
1. Governmental and public regulated utility buildings and structures necessary for the
health. safety and general welfare of the community provided that:
a. When abutting a residential use in a residential use district, the property is
screened and landscaped in compliance with Section 401.15.E. of this
Ordinance.
21 -2
b. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
2. Private or semi - public recreational buildings and neighborhood or community
centers; public and private educational institutions limited to elementary, junior high
and senior high schools; college or universities, religious institutions such as
churches, chapels, temples and synagogues and public correctional institutions,
provided that:
a. Side yards shall be double that required for the district, but no greater than
fifty (50) feet.
b. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is
provided in compliance with Section 401.15.E. of this Ordinance.
c. Adequate off- street parking and access is provided on the site of the
principal use in compliance with Section 401.15.F. of this Ordinance and that
such parking is adequately screened and landscaping from surrounding and
abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 401.15.E. of this
Ordinance.
d. Adequate off- street loading and service entrances are provided and
regulated where applicable by Section 401.15.F. of this Ordinance.
e. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
3. Commercial outdoor recreational areas including golf courses and clubhouse
country clubs, and similar facilities provided that:
a. The principal use, function or activity is open, outdoor in character.
b. When abutting a residential use or a residential use district, the property is
screened and landscaped in compliance with Section 401.15.E. of this
Ordinance.
c. The land area of the property containing such use or activity meets the
minimum established for the district.
d. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
21 -3
4. Cemeteries, provided that:
a. The overall site does not contain more than forty (40) acres.
b. The site accesses on a minor or intermediate arterial only.
c. The site is totally screened from view in accordance with Section 401.15.E.
of this Ordinance.
d. The applicant has applied for a comprehensive plan amendment and said
amendment has been processed and approved in accordance with
applicable State Statutes.
e. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met. -
5. Single satellite dish TVROs greater than one (1) meter in diameter provided that:
a. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 and Section 401.15.P of this
Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met.
6. Cellular telephone antennas not located on a public structure provided that:
a. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 and Section 401.15.P of this
Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met.
2 1 -4
5
, R i :/..!' .1 -r i.; -L . ( - 4,, ' ' ..,\.7. .1 ,. %ff 4,k,--''''t ' ..,„'"'Y..! l' '''•`''''',- '''<--.. \ \ r
' , , tom I �x
"dt °- .krt'1 .:4"`1 R YAr C'
e f ti ns .e ., ' . :; •C y r i t � r^ I $ ; � s.""," 44 >`wi
S Y2' , , Y.`T'Yc i 3. - ` Mme
• .S t 111• 10 pau�
N 5, S 4a C52:tw / / . a 36 •...
k. f� M M• alt
ti ; 'A , - T0.. ._ ' . n� /// / MiY /1/ r.a
5 - "✓}.. \ NMI n �Nlpl
II, 10 11111
. -440//41
_K .11v'n a- "a- lqN��� -
Y ��/ / \ A r • MI
Il / S • l I.l ■l1 .t
a M � a
y a NW t Nr as
• fN- "t.p •
t�
' et Nib ct 1
VI . v a . r p x• aaa r \\
■
lw rrrr■ I, ,.� ..relaw 1N• .> : � •
• p• /Nr M N aI I au •M
�. N as INI• ... �
111111
1 EL +gda rl °
irriluvin
N ; 111i\
,, , illi 11■101\\\\
: ipo. 1.
. —AI
Ilk
IR 6 ■ _ ,k „mot
4 1 ,......utr,,, .,, s, „,, .4„...;.4,..„.„;*,„,,,,, -,B a ,.- .„, 4- - ...-
� � /� ,.. >i�, ,, l Yxb.K`.�t. .: '$.1.S.id Y„tSi- o. `�
Villik
1.-- — ��...a�. 1 ;� 6v . ; a r a a
a'?. w A 9'";� x$16”. i 4 i t + - `:
pares Rezone - Open Space Conservat
..
:. Properties Acquired by MNDOT ' lac
Current Zoning Districts
R -1, Single Family Residential I, Industrial N
R -2, Low & Medium Density Residential El 0, Open Space Conservation
® R -3, Multiple Family Residential PUD, Planned Unit Development
R -B, Residential / Business Transitional - Annexation 0.04 0 0.04 0.08 Miles
F' 9 B -2, General Business Waterbodies
CITY OF
-
OAK PARK HEIGHTS
— _ 14168 N. 57th Street • Box 2007. Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Phone: (612) 439 -4439 • FAX 439 -0574
ENCLOSURE 8
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
POSSIBLE AMENDMENT OF CITY ORDINANCES
The Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights will hold a Public Hearing on
Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. at Oak Park Heights City Hall at 14168 North 57th Street
to discuss the possible amendment of the Subdivision ordinance to add provisions for a Planning
Commission
All who wish to comment are asked to attend and be heard.
Date: June 30, 1998
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Thomas M. Melena
City Administrator
Tree City U.S.A.
•
N
N ORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
BICLOSORE 9
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Brad Digre / Scott Richards
DATE: 8 July 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Subdivision Ordinance Revision: Addition of
Planning Commission Language / Park Dedication Issues
FILE NO: 798.04 -98.14
Attached is a draft of the Subdivision Ordinance with Planning Commission procedures
and responsibilities added. For your reference, those sections that are underlined include
new language and language that is Tined out is to be removed.
The recent changes to the Subdivision Ordinance are as follows:
GENERAL PROVISIONS. Preceding subdivision plat approval by the City Council a
change was made to refer plats to the Planning Commission.
MINOR SUBDIVISIONS. Language concerning exceptions (i.e. Minor Subdivisions) was
added to include requests to combine two (2) existing platted lots and to include the
division of a lot from a larger tract of land that creates no more than two lots and has not
been part of a minor subdivision within the last five (5) years. Content and data
requirements, design standards and processing stipulations for Minor Subdivisions were
also added.
PLANNING COMMISSION. The Planning Commission was defined as the Planning
Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights.
PRELIMINARY PLAT. The preliminary plat process from filing to City Council action was
improved and now involves the Planning Commission. Specifically, the process covers
pre - application, application, authorization, public hearing (conducted by the Planning
Commission including a report of recommendations to the City Council), validity of notice,
technical assistance reports, review by other commissions or jurisdictions, requests for
additional information, Planning Commission review and City Council action.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2 - 5 9 5 - 9 6 3 6 FAX 6 1 2- 595 -9837 E -MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
ow
FINAL PLAT. The final plat process was amended to include review and approval by the
Planning Commission. Specifically, the final plat along with the recommendations of the
Planning Commission, City staff or consultants is submitted to the City Council for final
approval by resolution.
CONDITION ESTABLISHING PREMATURE SUBDIVISION. Under the section concerning
the lack of adequate roads or highways to serve the subdivision, Minnesota Department
of Highways was changed to the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
PLAT AND DATA REQUIREMENTS. Preliminary Plat. Supplementary Information. The
submission of supplementary information was amended to include the Planning
Commission.
DESIGN STANDARDS. Protected Areas. In addition to the City Council, the Planning
Commission will also determine whether protection will be accomplished through the
methods stipulated.
REQUIRED BASIC IMPROVEMENTS. Street Improvements. The City Arborist is added
to recommend conformance of tree and boulevard sodding as required by the City Council.
NON - PLATTED SUBDIVISION. Registered Land Surveys. The Planning Commission is
added to formulate a recommendation to the City Council.
VARIANCES, STANDARDS. The variance procedures were significantly modified to
include the Planning Commission in the process for making recommendations to the City
Council, hearing the City staffs report and recommendations, and setting a date for a
public hearing.
PARK LAND DEDICATION. Staff has also revisited the issue of Park Dedication
Requirements. Based upon our analysis in 1995 (see Attachment) we have concluded that
both the cash and land dedication requirements can be revised to provide a dedication
similar to what is being required in cities in the metro as well as the St. Croix Valley area.
We have not made changes to the Subdivision Ordinance at this time, but recommend that
the Planning Commission discuss the issues.
The current requirements for land dedication are based on a formula that one (1) acre of
land be conveyed to the City for every seventy -five (75) people the platted land could
house. This formula results in a yield of approximately 8.8 percent of the total acreage.
We suggest a revision that would provide at least 10 percent of the gross land area that
is being subdivided. To achieve this level of land dedication we recommend adjusting the
formula to one (1) acre for every sixty -five (65) people the platted land could house.
The current cash dedication yields a proportionately lesser amount and will also require
2
adjustment. Our office recommends $900 per unit for all types of residential units and
$3000 per acre for commercial /industrial dedication.
Under the new formula's, a 40 acre parcel with a cash value of $43,560/acre and
development of 75 single family lots, land dedication would be 4.04 acres (approximately
10% of gross land area) worth $175,915 and the cash dedication would be $67,500. If the
City decides to raise the cash dedication to equal the land value, $2,178 would need to be
paid per lot. At this time, considering what area communities are charging on a per lot
cash basis it would be impossible to raise cash dedication to that level. For that reason
we recommend the $900 per unit cash dedication similar to what other communities are
charging.
Also in 1995 the City indicated that we may need to do a more specific study and consider
formulating a trail dedication per each unit.
3
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 98-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE OAK PARK HEIGHTS
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO ADD PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 402.01 Subd. D, is hereby amended to add the following:
Subd. D Before any plat shall be recorded or be of any validity, it shall be referred to
the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council of the City of
Oak Park Heights as having fulfilled the requirements of this Ordinance.
Section 2. Section 402.01 Subd. G., is hereby amended to add the following:
Subd. G. ExceptieRs Minor Subdivisions:
a. Qualification. This section shall apply to the following applications: In the
- -
1. In the case of a request to divide a portion of a lot where the division
is to permit the adding of a parcel of land to an abutting lot so that no
additional Tots are created and both new Tots conform to Zoning
Ordinance lot size minimum standards
2. In the case of a request to combine two (2) existing platted Tots.
3. In the case of a request to divide a lot from a larger tract of land and
thereby creating no more than two lots. both of which conform to
Zoning Ordinance minimum standards. To qualify. the parcel of land
shall not have been part of a minor subdivision within the last five (5)
years.
4. In the case of a request to divide a base lot which is a part of a
recorded plat on which has been constructed a two- family dwelling.
townhouse or quadraminium, where the division is to permit individual
private ownership of a single dwelling unit within such a structure and
the newly created property lines will not cause any of the unit lots or
the structure to be in violation of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance.
or the State Building Code.
b. Content and Data Requirements: - - - - _ - - : _ - : - - - ::' . ': - _ ; _ -
1. Certificate of Survey: The requested minor division shall be prepared
by a registered land surveyor in the form of a Certificate of Survey.
2. Property Description and Submission Information: The data and
supportive information detailing the proposed subdivision shall be the
same as required for a preliminary plat as described in Section
402.06 of this Chapter. Exceptions. as stipulated in writing. may be
granted by the Zoning Administrator.
c. Design Standards. The minor subdivision shall conform to all design
standards as specified in this Chapter. Any proposed deviation from said
standards shall require the processing of a variance request.
d. Processing:
1. If the land division involves property which has been previously
platted. or the total property area included is greater than ten (10)
acres. the Zoning Administrator may approve the subdivision.
provided that it complies with applicable provisions of this Chapter.
2. In the case of applications involving property which has not been
previously platted, and is Tess than ten (10) acres in total area.
applicable processing provisions of Section 402.04. Preliminary
Platting shall be followed.
2
Section 3. Section 402.03 Subd. LL, is hereby added:
Subd. LL Planning Commission. The Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park
Heights.
Section 4. Section 402.04 Subd. B.1., is hereby amended to add the following:
1. -
- - .
---- - --- --
Pre- Application. Applicants requesting
preliminary plat approval are required to contact the Zoning Administrator in
order to set up a pre - application meeting with the City Engineer. City
Attorney. City Planner. and /or City Building Official to discuss the project in
question. A staff meeting is strongly recommended for all types of proposals
to answer questions on processing the application. payment of fees. explain
ordinance requirements. identify details of the request. review concept plans.
provide advice, and potentially avoid any unnecessary plan modifications or
site design related conflicts.
Section 5. Section 402.04 Subd. B.2., is hereby amended to add the following:
2 . - 4 . - - • : - - - 4 4 4 - - - - _ -_: _:: _ : -- --
• - ; - - - Irma - _ - • - 1.1.1. .. ; - - ; - -- _ -
-- - - -
- -- -
• - _ = 44* - • - _ _ -- 4- - • - - - = _ - . Application. Request for
preliminary plat approval, as provided within this Ordinance, shall be filed
with the City on an official application form at least twenty (20) days prior to
the date set for a public hearing. Such application shall be accompanied by
a fee as outlined in Section 401.08 of the Oak Park Heights Zoning
3
Ordinance. Such application shall also be accompanied by five (5) large
scale copies and one (1) reduced scale (8-1/2 x 11") copy of detailed written
and graphic materials fully explaining the proposed change, development. or
use. and a mailing list provided by the applicant from the records of the
Washington County Assessors Office for all homes, businesses and property
located within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the subject property. Where
necessary. the City shall refer said application along with all related
information, to other City staff or agencies for their report and
recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. The request
shall be considered officially submitted and the application approval timeline
commences when all the informational requirements are complied with.
Section 6. Section 402.04 Subd. B.3., is hereby amended to add the following:
3. - -- _ -
- - - - - - - - • • _ - - - • . Proof of Ownership or
Authorization. The applicant shall supply proof of title of the property for
which the preliminary plat approval is requested, consisting of an abstract of
title or registered property abstract currently certified together with any
unrecorded documents whereby the petitioners acquire a legal ownership of
equitable ownership interest or supply written authorization from the owner(s)
of the property in question to proceed with the request. Prior to approving an
application for a preliminary plat. the City shall receive from the applicant
certification that there are no delinquent property taxes. special assessments.
interest. or City utility fees due upon the parcel of land to which the
preliminary plat approval application relates.
Section 7. Section 402.04 Subd. B.4., is hereby amended to add the following:
4.
44 -- : -- : -_ -. - _ - -- -- - -- - 4. - -
feguired. Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall conduct the
hearing and report its findings and recommendations to the City Council.
Said hearing shall be established once adequate time has been allowed for
staff and advisory body review of the plat. Notice of said hearing shall
consist of a legal property description. description of request and map
detailing property location. and be published in the official newspaper at least
ten (10) days prior to the hearing and written notification of said hearing shall
be mailed at least ten (10) days prior to all owners of land within three
hundred fifty (350) feet of the boundary of the property in question.
4
Section 8. Section 402.04 Subd. B.5., is hereby amended to add the following:
5. Council Action.. Validity of Notice. Failure of a property owner to receive
said notice shall not invalidate any such proceedings as set forth within this
Ordinance.
a.
b. : : _ . _:::. ; ;. : - -
c.
Section 9. Section 402.04 Subd. B.6., is hereby added with the following stipulations:
6. Technical Assistance Reports. After the public hearing has been set. the
Zoning Administrator shall instruct the appropriate staff of consultants to
prepare technical reports where appropriate. and provide general assistance
in preparing a recommendation of the action to the Planning Commission.
Section 10. Section 402.04 Subd. B.7., is hereby added with the following stipulations:
7. Review by Other Commissions or Jurisdictions. The Zoning Administrator
shall refer copies of the preliminary plat to the Park Board. County. State or
other public jurisdictions for their review and comment. where appropriate and
when required.
5
or
Section 11. Section 402.04 Subd. B.B., is hereby added with the following stipulations:
8. Additional Information. The City Council, the Planning Commission, and City
staff shall have the authority to request additional information from the
applicant concerning operational factors or to retain expert testimony with the
consent and at the expense of the applicant concerning_operational factors.
said information to be declared necessary to establish performance
conditions in relation to all pertinent sections of this Ordinance. Failure on
the part of the applicant to supply all necessary supportive information may
be grounds for denial of the request.
Section 12. Section 402.04 Subd. B.9., is hereby added with the following stipulations:
9. Planning Commission Review. The applicant or a representative thereof
shall appear before the Planning Commission in order to answer questions
concerning the proposed amendment or conditional use. The Planning
Commission shall recommend approval or denial of the request.
Section 13. Section 402.04 Subd. B.10., is hereby added with the following stipulations:
10. City Council Action.
a. The City Council shall not act upon a preliminary plat until they have
received a report and recommendation from the Planning Commission.
Upon completion of the report and recommendation by the Planning
Commission the request shall be placed on the agenda of the City
Council. Such reports and recommendations shall be entered in and
made part of the permanent written record of the City Council meeting.
b. If all requirements of this Ordinance are complied with, the City
Council shall act upon the preliminary plat and may impose conditions
and restrictions which are deemed necessary within sixty (60) days of
the date of the close of the public hearing.
c. If the preliminary plat is not approved by the City Council. the reasons
for such action shall be recorded in the proceedings of the Council and
transmitted to the applicant. If the preliminary plat is approved. such
approval shall not constitute final acceptance of the layout.
Subsequent approval will be required of the engineering proposals
and other features and requirements as specified by this Ordinance to
be indicated on the final plat. The City Council may require such
revisions in the preliminary plat and final plat as it deems necessary
for the health, safety, general welfare and convenience of the City of
6
f
Oak Park Heights.
d. If the preliminary plat is approved by the City Council. the subdivider
must submit the final plat within one hundred (100) days after said
approval or approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void.
unless a request for time extension is submitted in writing and
approved by the City Council.
Section 14. Section 402.04 Subd. C.2., is hereby amended to add the following:
2. Approval of the City Council Planning Commission. Ten (10) copies of the
final plat shall be submitted to the City Clerk Zoning Administrator for
distribution to the City Council Planing Commission and appropriate staff,
twenty (20) days prior to the meeting at which consideration is requested.
During the said twenty (20) days, the City staff shall examine the final plat
and prepare a recommendation to the City Council Planning Commission.
The final plat, together with the recommendations of the Planning
Commission, City staff or consultants shall be submitted to the City
Council for approval. - - - ., - : _ - - _ . - _ :::. - :: .
Section 15. Section 402.04 Subd. C.2A., is hereby added with the following
stipulations:
2A. Approval of the City Council. If accepted by the City Council. the final plat
shall be approved by resolution. which resolution shall provide for the
acceptance of all agreements for basic improvements. public dedication
and other requirements as indicated by the City Council. If disapproved.
the grounds for any refusal to approve a plat shall be set forth in the
proceedings of the Council and reported to the person or persons applying
for such approval. The Council's decision shall be made within sixty (60)
days after the first meeting at which it received the final plat.
7
Section 16. Section 402.05 Subd. A.3a, is hereby amended to add the following:
a. Roads which serve the proposed subdivision are of such a width,
grade, stability, vertical and horizontal alignment, site distance and
surface condition that an increase in traffic volume generated by the
proposed subdivision would create a hazard to public safety and
general welfare, or seriously aggravate an already hazardous
condition, and when, with due regard to the advice of Washington
County and /or the , Minnesota
Department of Transportation. said roads are inadequate for the
intended use.
Section 17. Section 402.06 Subd. B.4., is hereby amended to add the following:
4. Supplementary Information. Any or all of the supplementary information
requirements set forth in this subdivision shall be submitted when deemed
necessary by the Planning Commission, City staff, consultants, advisory
bodies and /or City Council.
Section 18. Section 402.07 Subd. G.2., is hereby amended to add the following:
2. Based upon the necessity to control and maintain certain sensitive areas,
the Planning Commission and City Council, based upon the review of the
City Engineer, shall determine whether said protection will be
accomplished through lot redesign with easements and enlargement or
dedication of those sensitive areas in the form of outlots.
Section 19. Section 402.09 Subd. C.6., is hereby amended to add the following:
6. Trees and boulevard sodding shall be planted in conformance with the
standards and specifications as recommended by the City Arborist and
required by the City Council.
Section 20. Section 402.10 Subd. A. is hereby amended to add the following:
A. Registered Land Surveys.
Subdivision by Registered Land Survey shall only be allowed for torrens property.
It is the intention of this Ordinance, however, that where used, all Registered
Land Surveys in the city shall be presented to the City Council in the form of a
preliminary plat in accordance with the standards set forth in this Ordinance for
preliminary plats and that the Planning Commission shall recommend and the
City Council shall first approve the arrangement, size, and relationships of
proposed tracts, and that tracts to be used as easements or roads should be so
8
e
f.
dedicated. Unless an approval has been obtained from the City Council, in
accordance with the standards set forth in this Ordinance, building on tracts
which have been so subdivided by Registered Land Surveys and the City may
refuse to take over tracts as streets or roads or to improve, repair or maintain any
such tracts unless so approved.
Section 21. Section 402.11 Subd. A., is hereby amended to add the following:
A. Finding
The City Council may grant a variance from the minimum standards of this
Ordinance (not procedural provisions) when, in its opinion, undue hardship may
result from strict compliance. In granting any variance, the Planning Commission
shall recommend and the Council shall prescribe any conditions that it deems
necessary to or desirable for the public interest. In making its recommendation,
the Council shall take into account the nature of the proposed use of land and the
existing use of land in the vicinity, the number of persons to reside or work in the
proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. A variance shall only
be granted when the City Council finds:
Section 22. Section 402.11 Subd. B.3., is hereby amended to add the following:
3. The variance application shall also be referred to the City staff for a report
and recommendation to be presented to the City Council Planning
Commission. The City staffs report and recommendations shall be given
to the City Council Planning Commission prior to the
meeting at which said report and recommendation are to be presented.
Section 23. Section 402.11 Subd. B.4., is hereby amended to add the following:
4. The applicant, or a representative thereof, shall appear before the
Planning Commission artefiefrGitreettneif in order to answer questions
concerning the variance request.
Section 24. Section 402.11 Subd. B.S., is hereby amended to add the following:
5. The City Council, Planning Commission and City staff shall have the
authority to request additional information from the applicant concerning
the variance or to retain expert testimony with the consent and at the
expense of the applicant concerning said variance where said information
is declared necessary to insure preservation of health, safety and general
welfare.
9
gr
Section 25. Section 402.11 Subd. B.6., is hereby amended to add the following:
6. The City Council Planning Commission shall request the City Clerk Zoning_
Administrator to set a date for a public hearing. Notice of such hearing
shall be published in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to
said hearing, and individual notices shall be mailed not less than the (10)
days nor more than thirty (30) days prior to the hearing to all property
owners within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the parcel included in the
request.
Section 26. Section 402.11 Subd. B.7A., is hereby added with the following
stipulations:
7A. Recommendations of the Planning Commission, City staff or consultants shall be
submitted to the City Council for approval.
Section 27. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and
publication.
PASSED this day of 1998.
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
By:
David Schaaf, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Tom Melena, City Administrator
10
N Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc.
C C O M M U N I T Y P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • M A R K E T R E S E A R C H
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Robertson
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: Oak Park Heights - Park Dedication /Annexation Area Park
FILE NO: 798.02 - 95.12
BACKGROUND
Due to quickly escalating land costs within the area annexed to the City in 1991, the issue of
whether to update park dedication fees has been raised by Council members. The existing fee
system is consistent with many older communities in the Metropolitan Area which are not
experiencing growth and rising land costs. Many of the developing communities our office
represents both within and outside the limits of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) are
addressing the issue of park dedication fees as the costs of building park and trail systems increase.
The issue is further compounded by the U.S. Supreme Court decision on Dolanci V. City of
Tigard which establishes the precedent that a governmental taking must be roughly proportional
to the legitimate governmental interest.
In order to address these issues, the City of Oak Park Heights must examine the costs of
developing the park system in the annexation area versus the anticipated land /cash dedication from
future development in this area. Park fees must make up a reasonable proportional cost of
developing a park system. If the park land /cash dedication from an area exceeds the total cost of
investment in the park system for the locale then the issue of a "taking" without fair return
becomes a concern. Park and trail fees from other developing communities are also presented
here for comparison purposes.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A - Updated Cost Estimate for Annexation Area Park
Exhibit B - Annexation Area /Park Plan Map
Exhibit C - Memo - Dolan V. Tigard - Impacts for Municipalities
Exhibit D - Park Dedication Comparative Analysis
5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Fax. 595 -9837
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT COSTS - ANNEXATION AREA PARK
A preliminary estimate of costs was calculated in 1994 for the annexation area park. The numbers
have been slightly revised and updated as found in Exhibit A. The total cost of the annexation
area park as currently configured is $1,815,120 of which $1,045,445 is credited to land costs
estimated at $43,560 per acre. It is assumed that land dedication will be required of Elmer Haase
for the residential property south of 58th Street. That land dedication would consist of 7.46 acres
with a value (again based upon a value of $43,560) of $324,522.
PROJECTED PARK DEVELOPMENT REVENUES
Existing Park Dedication Requirements
The current park dedication requirements from the Oak Park Heights Subdivision ordinance are
as follows:
402.08 Park Land Dedication Requirements
Subd. I. In residential plats one acre of land shall be conveyed to the City as an
outlot by warranty deed for every seventy -five (75) people the platted land
could house based upon the following population calculations:
Single Family Detached Dwelling Lots 3.5 persons
Two - Family Dwelling Lots 6.0 persons
Apartments, Townhouses, Condominium
and Other Dwelling Units 1 person per
bedroom
Subd. J. In lieu of a park land donation, the City may require the following cash
donations:
Single Family Detached Dwelling Lots $450.00
Two - Family Dwelling Lots $800.00
Apartments, Townhouses, Condominiums $250.00 per unit plus
and Other Dwelling Units $ 85.00 per bedroom
above the first
bedroom of
each unit
Commercial and Industrial $1,750.00 per acre -
pro -rated
2
Depending upon the density of development, the current park dedication formula results in a yield
of approximately 8 to 10 percent of the total acreage which is in line or slightly below most of the
communities that were surveyed. The cash dedication yields a proportionately lesser amount. In
a 40 acre parcel with a development of 75 lots, the land dedication would be 3.5 acres which has
a current value of $152,450. If cash were required under the current formula, the dedication
would be $33,750.
Park Dedication Yields
To determine the overall park dedication yield from the annexation area, a review of the cash
dedication that has been received and the cash and land to be dedicated is as follows:
Cash
Cash Dedication Received:
River Hills $24,750.00
WalMart $36,750.00
Brackey $98,735.00
Applebees /Haase $25,795.00
Subtotal $186,030.00
Cash Dedication Potential:
Kern - 40 acres (commercial)
40 x $1,750.00 = $70,000.00
Haase - 30 acres (commercial)
30 x $1,750.00 = $52,500.00
Other - 5.5 acres (residential)
10 lots x $450.00 = $ 4,500.00
Subtotal $127,000.00
TOTAL CASH DEDICATION $313,030.00
Land
Haase - South of 58th - 7.46 Acres
Cash Value at $43,560 per Acre $324,958.00
TOTAL DEDICATION FROM ANNEXATION AREA (IN CASH) $637,988.00
3
•
•
The significant shortfall in the potential costs of an annexation area park ($1,815,120.00) vs. the
yield from park dedication ($637,988.00) indicates that at least one or a combination of the
following steps must be taken:
1. Scale back the annexation area park plan.
2. Extend the time over which the program is to be implemented.
3. Seek to maximize park revenues through fee structures, grants and other sources.
4. Develop the park in conjunction with an elementary school.
COST DISTRIBUTION
It is expected that the cost of the park would not be funded by park dedication alone. The
assumption is that over time 15 % of the development funds will be from grants, 25 % from the
general fund or special financing, 10% from private contributions or volunteer labor, with the
remaining 50% from park dedication. The cost distribution would be as follows:
Total Park Cost $1,815,120
Grants 15 % $272,268
General Fund 25 % $453,780
Private Contributions 10 % $181,512
Park Dedication 50% $907,560
Actual park dedication anticipated from the annexation area is estimated at $637,988, resulting
in a shortfall of $269,572 from what will be required from this funding source.
To make up the shortfall, the dedication structure within the Subdivision Regulations would need
to be altered, but not exceed a level that is deemed appropriate for dedication purposes. Ten
percent of the property has been determined as the amount of land necessary to reasonably provide
park facilities for residential development. To comply with the Doland ruling, the City would still
utilize the formula method which individualizes the percent for each development based upon
overall density. The current schedule allows for a land dedication of .088 percent from the Haase
property south of 58th Street. Revising the formula to a minimum of 10% would increase the
dedication to 8.46 acres for an additional value of $43,995. To raise the cash dedication to a level
equal to a 10 % land dedication, a fee of $2,178 would need to be paid per lot. A cash dedication
fee at that level would likely be difficult to implement at this time. Most communities' cash
dedication fees do not equal the value of the land dedication. This is acceptable based on the
rationale that residents living in a development adjacent to park land would be in closer proximity
and benefit greater than those residents in developments that need to walk/ride a greater distance
to use the facility. An adjustment to the cash fee would be acceptable to reach a level consistent
with other developing communities. For instance, raising the fee to $900 per unit would increase
the park dedication revenue total approximately $4,500 for the annexation area.
4
Cash dedication amounts for commercial and industrial property should also be increased to
account for rising land values. Many communities do not charge commercial and industrial
development park dedication fees, but supporters of this type of fee argue that business generates
demand on parks due to league play or utilization of employees during breaks or at other times.
Raising the fee to $3,000 per acre would raise an additional $87,500 for the annexation area park.
Justification for raising the land/cash dedication amounts exists, but not to a level that would reach
50 % of the total park costs. The shortfall with the revised fee schedule would amount to
approximately $133,500. Other funding sources or a reduction in the park facilities would need
to be considered.
COMPARISON OF PARK FEES
A comparison of fees for other developing communities has been provided in Exhibit D for review
in conjunction with this study. The fee schedules of other communities are being provided only
for comparison and not as the basis for establishing a revised fee schedule.
TRAIL FEES
The City of Oak Park Heights has not in the past charged a separate trail fee as a part of the park
dedication process. Of the communities surveyed, only Eagan has a separate trail dedication
requirement. The cost to build a trail adjacent to the front or rear of residential lost in Oak Park
Heights is as follows:
Construction
80 foot lot @ $15/LF = $1,200
100 foot lot Ca $15 /LF = $1,500
Land Cost
Trails will be within parkland or roadway right -of -way in the
Annexation Area.
Eagan's requirement for cash contributions of $105 per residential dwelling unit and $880 per acre
for commercial, industrial and public facilities covers only a fraction of the cost of building trail
facilities. Our office will need to review this issue further and examine other trail fee examples
to make a specific recommendation for Oak Park Heights.
5
a
e
CONCLUSION /RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the analysis provided above, our office would recommend increasing the park
dedication requirements /fees as follows:
Residential
Land Dedication. The formula in the current regulations be revised to provide at least
10% of the gross land area that is being subdivided. The formula method will
individualize each development proposal based upon the density proposed to comply with
the Doland ruling.
Cash Dedication. $900 per unit for all types of residential units.
Commercial /Industrial Dedication
$3,000 per acre with no specific land requirements.
The City Council should review the information presented, schedule a public hearing to revise the
subdivision regulations, or allow the Park board to review the issue first and make a specific
recommendation. Additionally, if the Council would like additional information on park
dedication, in particular what other communities have established, our office could do more
research on this topic. We do intend to review the issue of trail fees /dedication further and
provide a specific recommendation if requested by the Council.
pc: Mayor and City Council
Mark Vierling
Joe Anderlik
6
City of Oak Park Heights
Cost Estimate for Park /Playground Facilities
Based Upon Approved Annexation Area Park Layout
Unit Est.
Item Description Price Qty. Cost
Baseball /Softball (per field) :
Strip & stockpile topsoil $ 500 /LS 1 $ 500
Rough /fine grading, spread topsoil 5,000 /LS 1 5,000
Limestone Infield, 4" deep 4,200 /EA 1 4,200
Outfield, seeded 1,600 /AC 1.4 2,240
Infield, sodded 1.80 /SY 400 720
Backstops, 30' wide back, 10' wings,
hooded, 4' overhang, chain link 4,500 /EA 1 4,500
Fencing, 1,400 linear feet per field, 9.00 /LF 1400 12,600
4' high
$29,760
Soccer (per field):
Strip /stockpile topsoil 500 /LS 1 500
Rough /fine grade, spread topsoil 5,000 /LS 1 5,000
Seeded 1,600 /AC 3.8 6,080
Sodded 1.80 /SY - -
Goal Nets 2,000 /PR 1 2,000
$13,580
Football (per field) :
Strip /stockpile topsoil 500 /LS 1 500
Rough /fine grading, spread topsoil 5,000 /LS 1 5,000
Seeded 1,600 /AC 3.8 6,080
Sodded 1.80 /SY - -
Goal Posts 3,000 /PR 1 3,000
$14,580
Basketball (per full court):
Rough /fine grading, asphaltic concrete,
hoops /poles, color finish $13,500
Tennis (per court) :
Rough /fine grading, asphaltic concrete,
net and posts, color finish 3 54,000
Periphery Fence, 360 linear feet,
10 -12' high, 9 gauge 16.00 /LF 3 17,280
$71,280
1
EXHIBIT A (3 PAGES)
•
Freeskate /Hockey:
Grading and Finish 5,000
Hockey Boards 5,000
$10,000
Picnic Tables /Shelters:
Picnic Table, 8' pine w /metal legs 300 /EA 6 1,800
6' metal coated 400 /EA *
Picnic Shelter, single, pine /metal, 8' 2,500 /EA *
Picnic Shelter, 15x24, wood /shingles 6,000 /EA 1 6,000
Picnic Shelter, 28x34, metal 8,000 /EA *
$7,800
Playground Equipment:
Modular Tot Play Structure, 8x17,
20x30 protective area, 16 -18 kids 7,000 /EA 1 7,000
Deluxe Modular Play Structure, 24x30,
37x42 protective area, 25 -30 kids 14,000 /EA 1 14,000
Spring Toys 400 /EA *
See Saw 900 /EA *
Swingset, standard metal, 4 seats 700 /EA *
Slide, metal, 70" 1,000 /EA *
Swing, adult bench 600 /EA *
$21,000
Seating:
Bench, backless, wood, 8' 350 /EA 6 2,100
Bench w /back, 6' metal 520 /EA *
Player benches, 14' metal w /back 400 /EA 2 800
Player benches, 14' w /out back 250 /EA *
Bleachers, 5 rows @ 15 feet, wood /metal 1,000 /EA 2 2,000
$4,900
Support Elements:
Bike Rack, 10' wood & metal (14 bike cap.) 350 /EA 1 350
Trash Receptacle w /lid (metal or wood) 200 /EA 10 2,000
Water Fountain, metal ground mounted 1,130 /EA 1 1,130
Grills, black metal 140 /EA 5 700
Fencing, 1,700 linear feet, 9 gauge (along residential lots) *
4' high, $9 /linear foot *
6' high, $12 /linear foot 20,400
$24,580
Trails, approximately 10,000 linear feet:
6,000 linear feet bituminous paved, 8 foot
width, 3" asphalt on 4" gravel base 15 /LF 90,000
4,000 linear feet crushed limestone paved,
8 foot width, 4" deep 6.50 /LF 26,000
$116,000
2
Parking Lot:
Paving, 60 stalls, 24,000 sf, 3" finish layer w/ 4"
asphaltic base and gravel subgrade 1.35 /SF 32,400
Curbing, 6x18 concrete, 1000 linear feet 7.00 /LF 7,000
Striping, 4" wide .20 /LF 1,500 300
$39,700
Structures:
Restroom, storage, warming house building,
picnic shelter, 50x75 wood construction 65 /SF 3,800 247,000
Footbridges, steel arch type w/ wood deck,
8 feet wide, 60' span 50 /SF 480 24,000
80' span 50 /SF 640 32,000
Landscaping, Signage, and Lighting:
(Estimated High Total) *$100,000
Subtotal - Park Facilities /Improvements $769,680
Land Cost:
East Area 16 Acres $43,560 /Acre 696,960
West Area 8 Acres $43,560 /Acre 348,480
Wetlands 11 Acres 0 0
Subtotal - Land $1,045,440
TOTAL $1,815,120
* Indicates options, types or quantities of items which are
currently unknown which will vary depending upon what is
chosen by the Park Board /City
3
w
1
. ., ,
) / 1 *
I m , (
TQ'
' '' /■(' - ' -- _--,// j - I ■;
/ ' • , ,
- '/,„/ I\ \''■ ' ,, --'' _ // ,--'' - ' , i I T i,,
,.._.„,( . _ „ ,,, , 7 , ,/ ,,- _ , , \1... 1 I ,
___, ( ■,_ ,7 — --4 , \\
\IT ill
(
rri )
(
k
. / 1 _ ?'• s 7 , _ I „,----- , ,,, .._ ..) ) \ )1 -- 1 1
/ A _ r /1‘ t .`-•
- \ J 1
.-' , ,,.,
? /
_ ) / 7 ,--.„.„,,,,:., \ \ ..,, \ ._, __,;2__::___- • ' (-
_ .,..___.: , i - z_ ___:-- 4- d v.,, 4 Tir -di' 5) .„ . . k :••,. ' _ :
// / , N \ \ N
r ..„
..'\ 'N\ " r\,,.--.,/ , - . , rIk ,• - 17 ..
k , 1 •, 1
\, „. ; - 7 (,) :),/,,.__ .,,,,...,.,.,,,. .......
)\, ,).-, , \,_,„ __ _. , i; . ,, .,..... -,.,....,.., „..... /
\ ,\ _ - .__ _,-,---4,t,.....„ ,.... , ,
, , ... , -,, ...i. ;
-- i
dili I i )8 1,,
( ' '-'-
:., /- i'/ 7 / / ' ,..A■ , 4 , ' Q f---7 I I
i
.--- ' ib7- : ••••,. c ..•,.. - -- 1 7 .-- ; -.---- L y i t . ' / ,' l 1 1
..._2: , ii, i,,,,,
\ , ___::::: _ .k
? ` \ )// -. ---;----- ' 7'' .. / I ' '
\
)11 Ifirati;fi - r ' - 0 / .1 '
1 /
zb ! 1' . 111111M „ ' :
r
, /-i 11 ( • 1 ;1"- 1 fl -----------
' --)-- 1
ilk _
,, _ 1 Will A■
) .,
)
ii -1 .c-f, z 71- /1 If
( 1) \ ,' -] , / t V i
5 r-
r , r '---
H ',
! gi ( -K 7/ %/y// 11 ../ i; : / i ' ,/ r <t 4) \ 1 I
L
( \
%//(((/„' ' ' /
le" ), .."-\----- .
I
r
0 .; V --.:-.' ' ''-'' "— ' I" . 7' . ' \ - -
m z.
\
i co - i II 1 i I
Eli --0 i
--1 - 111111( 1111111 ... 11 11 1 '
-
co 1 I I I
.- i - ■ ! l' ,: i ': ::' I / ' A --' /- r- , , • I i
(
— • . ' k+ . , '' li
.--
I� Northwest Associated Consultants Inc.
C O M M U N I T Y P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • M A R K E T R E S E A R C H
MEMORANDUM
TO: Oak Park Heights Mayor and City Council
FROM: Stephen Grittman/Scott Richards
DATE: 24 August 1995
RE: Administration - Dolan v. Ti .arcs - Impacts for Municipalities
FILE NO: 801
BACKGROUND
In June of 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Dolan V City of Tigard. As you may know,
Dolan was a case in which a landowner (Dolan) was required to dedicate a floodplain area and
a bike /pedestrian trail easement as condition of development approval on her lot, in this case, the
reconstruction of a new and larger hardware store. She contested the exactions, claiming that the
dedications were unconstitutional takings without compensation. The Supreme Court agreed that
the takings were legal, that is, that the governmental purpose was a legitimate one. The Court
focussed instead on the amount of taking as compared to the impact created by the development
on the lot in question. In a previous case, Nollan v. Cal_ Coastal Commission, the Court
established the rule that there must be an essential nexus between the taking and the "legitimate
governmental purpose ". Thus, California's exaction of a beachfront walking easement was not
reasonably related to its professed purpose of "increased visual access to the ocean ", even though
that purpose was legitimate.
In Dolan, the issue became: Are the exactions reasonably related in degree to the legitimate
governmental purpose, and especially those exactions which deprive a property owner of "the right
to exclude others ", such as trail easements? The majority of the Court ruled 5 -4 that they were
not in this case. They established a new rule that a governmental taking must be "roughly
proportional" (as opposed to merely related, or exactly proportional) to the legitimate
governmental interest.
Many development interests have considered Dolan to be a major victory with regard to property
rights. This may be true with regard to theory. However, it would seem that the real -world
impacts may be Less dramatic than advertised.
EXHIBIT C (4 PAGES)
5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Fax. 595 -9837
EVIPACTS IN MINNESOTA
There appear to be two primary upshots of this ruling for municipalities in Minnesota:
1) Cities must make individualized determinations as to the project impacts in relation to
the level of dedications and other exactions required. Since most cities make these
requirements at subdivision approval stage, this is where the determination of "rough
proportionality" must be done;
2) The burden is now on the City to show that the exaction is roughly proportional to the
proposed project's impacts. Formerly, there was a presumption that the City's exaction
requirement was legitimate. The developer challenging the City's exaction was burdened
with showing that it was either not a legitimate purpose, or there was no essential nexus.
The technical application of this new rule is that when a plat proposal comes in, the City's
response would be to analyze its impacts, determine what dedications are required, then
show the developer that the project impacts are roughly proportional to the dedications to
be required. If the City cannot do this, it would presumably have to pay for the excess
taking. [See comment below as to "Practical Effects "]
As noted, the net impact for the City is that any development exaction which goes beyond that
necessary to accommodate the development itself will have to be purchased. This includes street
rights -of -way, utility easements, area -wide ponding, park dedications, etc. This will almost
always be in cases of exactions for regional facilities, such as collector roads, sewer trunk line
easements which are wider than that necessary for a smaller lateral, or a park which is sized and
intended for service to portions of the City not a part of the proposed development.
PRACTICAL EFFECTS
There are a few things Cities apparently must do in order to comply with the Dolan ruling:
• Eliminate language in the park dedication sections of the Subdivision Ordinance which
prescribes a specific percentage land dedication. The previous Minnesota Court of
Appeals decision which resulted in a presumption that a 10% park dedication was
reasonable is overruled to the extent that it would endorse a blanket requirement. The
determination must be individualized to the project being proposed.
• Park dedication requirements may be "easy" to calculate for residential projects, due to
available national standards for park requirements. However, for cities which also assess
a park dedication fee for commercial development, the calculation will be more difficult.
Somehow, it will have to be established that the business places a quantifiable demand on
the recreation facilities through league play, etc.
2
• Although it is less clear, cities should assess and collect any dedication fees at the time of
subdivision approval, and tie their payment to some recordable document such as a
development agreement. In the event that the City does not wish to require full collection
of the fees at the time of platting, the charges should definitely be recorded through a
development agreement. If a City cannot point to a previous agreement to pay a park
dedication fee, presumably based on some sort of study, a subsequent buyer /builder may
be able to challenge the fee, requiring a new study for that particular building.
There are a few things which Cities may (or should) do, as well:
• Some people familiar with Minnesota law believe that it will be plausible to aggregate the
effects of local development in determining the need for area -wide dedications. This
theory assumes that one area will dedicate the parkland, a second will dedicate the
collector street ROW, and another will dedicate the ponding area, for example. In
aggregate, the dedications are "roughly proportional". If such aggregation were to occur,
it would seem most likely under the process described in the next paragraph.
• The bottom -line impact would seem more likely to be the following scenario: A developer
will come to the City to propose a project. If the City has done a thorough job of
Comprehensive Planning for all of its infrastructure requirements, such as collector/
arterial streets, trunk water and sewer, stormwater control systems, and parks, the City
will say to the developer: We think that the dedications for your project, based on our
Comprehensive Plan, are roughly proportional to your project impacts. If you design your
project to accommodate them, you will be able to get a preliminary plat request on the
Planning Commission agenda in two or three weeks. If, on the other hand, you would like
us to do a more individualized study, we will, per our responsibility under Dolan.
However, it is going to take us at least 60 days, and you will have to agree to escrow for
the cost of our consultants (just as many cities do now for §429 feasibility studies)." In
this scenario, the City needs to make sure that its Comprehensive Plan is complete with
regard to the infrastructure dedications it will want to require, including Park and Trail
locations, sizes, and service areas.
The vast majority of developers are not likely to embrace the idea of the cost or the wait, and will
agree to abide by the City's Comprehensive Plan. This assumes that the Plan is clear, reasonable,
and is complete with regard to all of the exactions the City will want to require. If the Plan is not
complete, then at least one individualized study will have to be done anyway, in which case the
developer may choose to require all of them. It is assumed that with individualized studies, the
City will have a difficult time showing rough proportionality in all cases, and will have to buy
some of its easement acquisition formerly gained through dedication requirements.
3
This latter approach would seem to be better for both the City and the developer. The developer
would not be held up, nor have to assume the costs of an uncertain study, and the City would not
have to end up purchasing easements and rights -of -way which previously were dedicated as a part
of the platting process.
The City has two options under the Dolan rule:
(1) The City may proceed under their current Comprehensive Plan, and conduct the
individualized studies as each development proposal comes in. As noted above, this
process may be more expensive and time consuming than previous plat approvals. To the
extent that developers are dissatisfied with this impact, it may tend to discourage
development activity.
(2) The City may update the various sections of its Comprehensive Plan which may result in
a physical or regulatory taking. For most communities, this may mean some general
tinkering with the utility, stormwater control, and transportation plans, and major work
in the areas of parks and trails.
In either of these cases (but especially the latter), the City should consider the use of
Development Agreements much more routinely where exactions are made. In this way, exactions
which are actually collected later than the filing of the final plat will be of record, and the
property owner will have notice of them.
pc: Mike Robertson
4
p
City of Oak Park Heights - Park Dedication Analysis
Metropolitan Area Comparison
August 15, 1995
City/ Residential - Land Residential - Cash Commercial Industrial
Township Dedication Dedication Dedication Dedication
Afton 10% of gross land area $2000 /residential $1500 /acre (there $1500 /acre (there
being subdivided dwelling unit are no land are no land
requirements) requirements)
Baytown $300 /lot $300 /lot $300 /lot $300 /lot
Township
Buffalo One acre of land for $800 /unit for single None None
every 75 persons the family lots,
platted land could $800 /unit for two -
house based upon 3.5 family lots, and
persons per single $400 /unit for
family lot, 6 persons multiple family
per two - family lot, and dwellings
1 person per bedroom
of multiple family units
Eagan The City has adopted a $875 per single Land up to 7.5% Land up to 7.5%
general standard of 15 family unit, $791 of net land area or of net land area or
*See foot- acres of land that is per duplex unit, .65 cents per .65 cents per
note and needed for every 1000 $723 per square foot/$2831 square foot/$2831
attached residents, of which 12 townhouse or quad per acre of net per acre of net
copy of acres shall be unit, and $726 per land area. A land area. A
subdivision designated as park. apartment or credit of up to credit of up to
ordinance multiple family unit. 25% of the 25% of the
section. 0 -1.9 units /ac =8% required required
This comm- >1.9 units /ac =10% dedication may be dedication may be
unity has a >3.5 units /ac =12% allowed by the allowed by the
very detailed >5.9 units /ac =14% City Council for City Council for
park and Add .5% for each unit stormwater stormwater
trail dedica- over 10 control facilities. control facilities.
tion process.
Eden Up to 10% of $945 /unit for all Up to 10% of the Up to 10% of the
Prairie subdivision area residential units subdivision land subdivision land
area or $3410 per area or $3410 per
acre cash acre cash
contribution contribution
EXHIBIT D (9 PAGES)
Page Two, City of Oak Park Heights - Park Dedication Analysis
15 August 1995
Lakeville <2.5 units /ac =10% Single and Multiple 5% of gross 5% of gross
2.5 -4 units/ac=11% Family = $650 per land arca or 5% land area or 5%
4 -6 units /ac =13% dwelling unit of current market of current market
6 -8 units /ac =15% value of value of
8 -10 units /ac =17% unimproved land unimproved land
10 +units /ac= 17 -20% as determined by as determined by
the County the County
Assessor Assessor
Minne- Reasonable portion of $400 /unit for single 10% of gross land 10% of gross land
tonka gross land area being family, $300 /unit area or 10 cents area or 20 cents
subdivided, but not for townhomes & per square foot of per square foot of
less than 10 percent duplexes, $250 /unit building area building area
for apartments
Stillwater 7% of gross land area 10% of County None None
Township Assessor's
unimproved value
of property
White Bear 10% of gross land area $500 /unit for single 10% of gross land 10% of gross land
Lake family, $1000 /lot area or 7% of area or 7% of
for two - family lots, land value or land value or
and $325 /unit plus $2500 /acre $2500 /acre
$75 /bedroom (2 +)
for apartments and
other mult. family
Woodbury A reasonable portion A cash amount Same as for Same as for
in compliance with equivalent to the residential uses residential uses
comprehensive plan, amount of land
determined on a case- required,
by -case basis determined on a
case -by -case basis
* Eagan is the only community that has a separate trail dedication requirement in addition to the above
outlined park dedication requirement. If land is identified within the City's Trail Plan as a trail route,
then land will be required, either as the sole means of dedication or in combination with a cash
dedication (the land dedication must be equal to or greater than the cash requirement). Cash
contributions are $105 per residential dwelling unit and $880 per acre for commercial, industrial and
public facilities.
•
_AGHN FIRE IEPI Hug 14'y5 1U :42 No.0U1 F.u2
CITY OF EAGAN
TRAIL DEDICATION
1995
POLICY ADOPTING STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING
THAT PORTION OF LAND BEING PLATTED, SUBDIVIDED OR DEVELOPED
WHICH IS TO BE CONVEYED OR DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC FOR TRAIL
PURPOSES OR WITH RESPECT TO WHICH CASH IS TO BE CONTRIBUTED
TO THE CITY IN LIEU OF SUCH CONVEYANCE OR DEDICATION, ALL AS
PROVIDED BY SECTION 13.20 OF THE CITY CODE.
1. PURPOSE
The City Council recognizes that in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare
of the residents of Eagan, a standard be adopted to complete the Park Trail as set
forth in the Eagan Comprehensive Guide Plan. The Eagan trail system is designed to
provide links between the various points of interest and public facilities which exist
and are planned within the community. To more adequately assure the timeliness
and priority of the completion of segments of the trail system, the Council has
resolved that as a prerequisite to plat approval, subdividers shall dedicate land for
trails and /or shall make cash contributions to the City's park trail fund as provided by
this section.
2. TRAIL LAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS
A. Land to be dedicated shall be reasonably suited for its intended use and shall
be at a location identified upon the City of Eagan's Trail Plan.
B. The Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission shall
recommend to the City Council the trail land dedication and /or cash
contribution requirements for proposed subdivision.
C. Changes in density of plats shall be reviewed by the Advisory Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Commission for reconsideration of trail land
dedication and cash contribution requirements.
D. When a proposed trail has been indicated in the City's official map or
Comprehensive Plan, and it is located in whole or in part within the proposed
plat, it shall be designated as such on the plat and shall be dedicated to the
City of Eagan. If the subdivider elects not to dedicate an area in excess of the
land required hereinunder for such a proposed trail, the City may consider
acquiring the trail land through purchase or condemnation.
E. Land area conveyed or dedicated to the City shall not be used in calculated
density requirements of the City zoning ordinance.
?GHN FIRE DEPT. TEL :612 -681 -4777 Hug 14'95 10:46 No.001 P.u.3
1995 Trail Dedication
Page 2
3. CASH DEDICATION
A. In lieu of trail land dedication as set forth on the City's Trail Plan, the City
may require the following case donations:
Residential Dwelling Units $105.00 per dwelling unit
Commercial /Industrial/ Public Facility $880.00 per acre
B. The City may elect to receive a combination of cash and land for trail use.
The fair market value of the land the City requires for its trail system shall be
subtracted from the cash contribution requirement set forth in paragraph 3(a).
The remainder shall be a cash contribution requirement.
C. The fair market value shall be determined as of the time of preliminary plat
approval in accordance with the following:
1. The City and the developer may agree as to the fair market value; or
2. The fair market value may be based upon a current appraisal submitted
to the City by the subdivider at the subdivider's expense. The appraisal
shall be made by appraisers who are approved members of the MAI or
equivalent real estate appraisal societies.
3. If the City disputes such appraisal, the City may, at the subdividers
expense, obtain a second appraisal of the property by an appraiser who
is a member of the MAI or equivalent real estate appraisal societies.
The second appraisal shall be conclusive evidence of the fair market
value of the land.
D. Planned Developments with mixed land uses shall make cash and /or trail land
contributions in accordance with this section based upon the percentage of
land devoted to the various uses.
E. Cash for trail contributors are to be calculated at the time of final plat
approval. With respect to a cash dedication for residential units, payment
shall be required prior to the City releasing the final plat for recording
purposes. With respect to commercial /industrial /public facility property,
payment for the cash dedication shall be made at the time of the application
for the building permit.
F. Cash contributions for the trail dedication shall be deposited in the City's Park
and Recreation Trail Development Fund and shall only be used for trail
planning, acquisition or development.
PROCEDURES 93 T RNt. DE D
•
=GHN FIRE DEPT. iEL :611 - 681 -4Y Hug 14'95 10:4,5 No.uu1 F.ui
CITY OF EAGAN
PARK DEDICATION POLICY
1995
POLICY ADOPTING STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR
DETERMINING THAT PORTION OF LAND BEING PLATTED,
SUBDIVIDED OR DEVELOPED WHICH IS TO BE CONTRIBUTED
TO THE CITY IN LIES OF SUCH CONVEYANCE OR DEDICATION,
ALL AS PROVIDED BY SECTION 13.20 OF THE CITY CODE.
1. PURPOSE:
The City Council recognizes it is essential to the health, safety and welfare of the residents
of Eagan and persons working in Eagan, that the character and quality of the environment
be considered to be of major importance in the planning and development of the city. In
this regard the manner in which land is developed and used is of high priority. The
preservation of land for park, playground and public open space purposes as it relates to
the use and development of land for residential , commercial /industrial purposes is essential
to the maintaining of a healthful and desirable environment for all citizens of the City. The
City must not only provide these necessary amenities for our citizens today, but also be
insightful to the needs of our future citizens.
It is recognized by the City Council that the demand for park, playground and public open
space within a municipality is directly related to the density and intensity of development
permitted and allowed within any given area. Urban type developments mean greater
numbers of people and higher demands for park, playground and public open space. To
disregard this principle is to inevitably over -tax existing facilities and thus, diminish the
quality of the environment for all.
The City's Park Systems Plan Study has established minimum community criteria for
meeting the needs of the residents of Eagan. In order to meet the community needs for
parks and open space, 15 acres of park shall be required for each 1,000 residents of which
12 acres shall be designated as neighborhood parks.
This shall be the standard upon which the City shall establish its parkland and parks cash
dedication.
It is the policy of Eagan that the following standards and guidelines for the dedication of
land for park, playground, and public open space purposes (or cash contributions in lieu
of such dedication) in the subdividing and developing of land within the city shall be
directly related to the density and intensity of each subdivision and development.
=iGRN FIRE DEPT. TEL:612- 681 -4777 Rug 14'95 10:44 No.001 P.05
1995 Parks Dedication
Page 2
2. RESIDENTIAL PARKLAND DEDICATION
The amount of land to be dedicated by a developer shall be based on the gross area of the
proposed subdivision, proposed type of dwelling unit and density. Census data for 1985
of 3.5 residents for single family, 2.8 for duplex, 2.1 for townhouse /quad. and 1.9 for
apartments has been used as density standards for formulating calculations in meeting the
criteria of park needs of Eagan residents.
The formula for land dedication:
The greater of 1) proposed unit per acre 2) zones density.
DWELLING UNITS LAND TO BE DEDICATED
0 - 1.9 units per acre 8%
1.9 - 3.5 units per acre 10%
3.5 - 5.9 units per acre 12%
6 - 10 units per acre 14%
10+ units per acre Add .5% for each unit over 10
3. STANDARDS FOR ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF LAND FOR PUBLIC PARK
PURPOSES
A. Land proposed to be dedicated for public purposes shall meet identified needs of the
City as contained in the Park Systems Plan and Comprehensive Guide Plan.
B. Prior to dedication for public purpose, the subdivider shall deliver to the City
Attorney, an abstract of title or registered property abstract for such dedication.
Such title shall vest in the City good and marketable title, free and clear of any
mortgages, liens, encumbrances, assessments and taxes. The conveyance
documents shall be in such form acceptable to the City.
C. The required dedication and/or payment of fees -in -lieu of land dedication shall be
made at time of final plat approval.
D. The removal of trees, topsoil, storage of construction equipment, burying of
construction debris, or stockpiling of surplus is strictly forbidden without the written
approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation.
E. Grading and utility plans, which may affector impact the proposed park dedication,
shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks and Recreation Director prior to
dedication , or at such time as reasonably determined.
AGRN FIRE DEPT. TEL :612- 681 - 4 7' 7 Aug 14'95 10:44 No.001 P.06
•
1995 Park Dedication
Page 3
F. To be eligible for park dedication credit, land dedicated is to be located outside of
drainways, flood plains or ponding area the site has been developed. Grades
exceeding 12% or are unsuitable for parks development shall be considered for
partial dedication.
Where ponding has been determined to have a park function, credit will be given
at a rate of 50% of the pond and adjoining land area below the high water level;
a minimum of 70% of land above the high water mark shall be dedicated before
pond credit is granted. Other City park dedication policies relating to pond
dedication must also be complied with.
In those cases where subdivider's and developers of land provide significant
amenities such as, but not limited to swimming pools, tennis courts, handball fields,
etc, within the development for the benefit of those residing or working therein, and
where, in the judgment of the Director of Parks and Recreation, such amenities
significantly reduce the demands for public recreational facilities to serve the
development, the Director of Parks and Recreation, such amenities significantly
reduce the demands for public recreational facilities to serve the development, the
Director may recommend to the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
Commission that the amount of land to be dedicated for park, playground and
public open area space (or cash contributions in lieu of such dedication) be reduced
by an amount not to exceed 25% of the amount calculated under paragraph 2
above.
G. The City, upon review, may determine that the developer shall create and maintain
some form of on -site recreation use by the site residents such as tot lots and open
play space. This requirement may be in addition to the land or cash dedication
requirement.
4. CASH DEDICATION
If, at the option of the City, it is determined that a cash dedication shall be made, said cash
shall be placed in a special fund for Parks and Recreation use and deposited by the
developer with the City prior to final plat approval.
The City Council, upon review and recommendation of the Advisory Parks, Recreation and
Natural Resources Commission, shall annually determine by resolution the park cash
dedication fee per residential unit. Said fee shall be determined by the average market
value of undeveloped residential property by zoning classification, served by major City
utilities, divided by the number of units per acre which shall provide the equivalency of
twelve acres per thousand population.
_HGHN FIRE DEP{. I rr hug 14 ' .UU1 r.ur
1995 Park Dedication
Page 4
Said cash dedication, effective January 1, 1995 shall be:
Cash Equivalent
Units Per Per Residential
Housing Type Average Market Value 100 Population Unit
Single Family $20,400 per acre 28 $875.00
Duplex $23,070 per acre 35 $791.00
Townhouse/Quad $28,317 per acre 47 $723.00
Apts /Multiple $31,460 per acre 52 $726.00
Cash dedication shall be determined /computed at the rate in effect at the time of final plat.
5. 1 DUSTRIA MERCIAL ICATIO LE UI REMENT
Subdivider's and developers of commercial /industrial land, including
commercial /industrial portionsof Planned Developments, shall be required atthe time
the site plan is approved and building permits are issued to dedicate to the City for
park, playground and public open space purposes, an amount of land up to 7.5% of
the net land area within the development as determined by the City.
In those cases where the City does not require park or open space within such
developments, the City shall require payment of fees in lieu of such land dedication
in an amount equal to $.065 per square foot/$2,831.00 per acre of net land area, or
such amount as determined by the City Council. Cash shall be contributed at the
time of approval of each final plat or at the time of site plan or building permit
approval, as determined by the City. The fee dedication requirement for all
commercial /industrial plats which have received site plan approval prior to January
1, 1983, but have not been issued building permit, approval from the City shall be
in an amount equal to $.0325 per sq. ft. of net land which shall be contributed at the
time of building permit approval.
A credit of up to 25% of the required dedication may be allowed by the City Council
for on -site storm sewer, water, ponding and settling basins provided that such
improvements benefit identifiable park and recreation water resources.
The City Council, upon review and recommendation of the Advisory Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, may annually review and determine
by resolution, an adjustment to the industrial /commercial fee based upon the City's
estimate of the average value of undeveloped commercial /industrial land in the City.
71,3mN F1KL ULF'I . ILL :b11 - b61 - 4((( Hug 14'yb 1U :4b No.UU1 F.uo
• 1995 Park Dedication
•
Page 5
•
6. REQUIRED IMERQVEMENTS
Developers shall be responsible for making certain improvements to their
developments for park, playground and public open space purposes as follows:
A. Provide finished grading and ground cover for all park, playground, trail and
public open spaces within their development as part of their development
contractor site plan approval responsibilities. Landscape screening shall be
in accordance with City Policy.
8. Establish park boundary corners for the purpose of erecting park limit signs.
The developer shall contact the appropriate Parks and Recreation Department
personnel for the purpose of identifying park property corners.
C. Provide sufficient public road access of no less than 300 feet for neighborhood
parks and additional frontage for community parks.
7. AUTHORITY
The State of Minnesota has recognized the importance of providing for parks and
open space in M.S.A. 462.358, Subdivision 2 (b) which clearly gives the right to
cities in its subdivisions regulations to require reasonable portions for public use. The
City of Eagan has, by this dedication policy, chosen to exercise this right in
establishing minimum requirements for meeting the public needs.
PROCCOURES93PARK. DWD
•
Northwest Associated Consultants Inc.
C O M M U N I T Y P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • M A R K E T R E S E A R C H
MEMORANDUM tr 1'
TO: Mike Robertson
•
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: 19 February 1996
RE: Oak Park Heights - Park and Trail Survey - Local Business
FILE NO: 798.04 - 96.04
As per your request, I have reviewed the results of the Park and Trail Survey of local
business in Oak Park Heights (see attached). The 17 percent response is very positive
considering 10 percent is an average response and 20 percent is excellent in community
survey work.
The purpose of the survey was to find out if Oak Park Heights business or employees were
using the park system for company picnics, events, or during the lunch hours. We wanted
to establish a justification for assessing park dedication fees and possibly for supporting
an increase in the fee schedule. From the results of the survey, 30 percent of the
respondents indicated that they or their employees used the City's park facilities in the last
three years. A small percentage of the respondents indicated that they supported
recreational league activities or utilized parks during the business day for lunch breaks,
walks, etc.
The survey, in part, helps the City justify its park dedication fee charged for new
commercial activity. It does not, however, help us establish the appropriate ratio of cash
to acreage formula for an Ordinance revision. Staff will continue to work on that specific
formula and provide a recommendation to Council.
5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Fax. 595 -9837
Enclosure 5
•
OAK PARK HEIGHTS
PARK AND TRAIL SURVEY TABULATIONS
1. Overall, how important do you feel it is for the City to
provide park and trail opportunities for community business?
22% - Very Important
•
22% - Somewhat. Important
48% - Not Important
8% - No °pinion
2. In the past three years, how often do you estimate that your
business (or employees of your business) have made use of
Oak Park Heights park and trail facilities (in association
with the business, i.e. company picnics, etc.)?
70% - None
11% - 1 -3 Times
4 ` / 0 - 4 - 6 Times
4% - 7 -9 Times
11% - 10+ Times
If you have utilized those facilities in the past year,
would you consider using them again?
30% - Yes. All surveys that indicated park usage stated
that they would utilized them again.
3. Please indicate the extent to which your business (or
employees of your business) utilize the following City park
facilities.
Valley View Brekke Park
4% - Use Regularly 8% - Use Regularly
15% - Use Occasionally 15% - Use Occasionally
81% - Never Use 78% - Never Use
Swager Park Cover Park
4% - Use Regularly 0% - Use Regularly
4% - Use Occasionally 4% - Use Occasionally
92% - Never Use 96% - Never Use
4. From a business owner /operator perspective, which of the
following park facilities do you (or your employees) use on
a regular basis (more than six times per year)?
9% - Trails 17% - Picnic Tables
12% - Picnic Shelters 9% - Benches
5% - Tennis Courts 9% - Baseball /Softball Fields
0% - Basketball Courts 12% - Swing /Play Sets
0% - Horseshoe Pits 3% - Hockey Rinks
9% - Grills 3% - Warming Houses
12% - Other: "None"
** NOTE: 63% of surveys returned did not check any item(s).
Percentages listed in question 44 are based upon the
34 responses received.
5). Approximately, what distance does your business lie from the
nearest park facility?
37% - Less than one- quarter (1/4) mile.
19% - Between one - quarter (1/4) and one -half (1/2) mile.
30% - Between one -half (1/2) and one (1) mile.
7% - Over one (1) Mile
7% - No response. ( *)
( *) One no response indicated, "Don't know - don't live here, so
not sure where parks are."
6). In the past three years, how many civic organization (i.e.,
Lions, American Legion, etc.) events have you attended at.
the City's park facilities?
89% - None
11% - 1 to 3
0% - More than 4
7). How many persons are employed by your business?
55% - 1 to 5
19% - 5 to 10
7% - 10 to 20
19% - More than 20
8). What type of business service do you provide?
18% - Office 0% - Pharmaceutical
71/4 - General Merchandise 0% - Lumber /Hardware
4% - Apparel 4% - Eating /Drinking
4% - Furniture /Home Furnishings 4% - Automobile
0% - Automotive 4% - No Response
4% - Food 51% - Other ( *)
( *) Others Listed: Electric Utility Medical /Dental
Dance Classes Marina & Service
Hair Salon Service
Boats & Cycles Child Care /Nursery School
Prison Manufacturing
9). Approximately, what percentage of your business' employees
reside in the City Of Oak Park Heights?
4% - 100 Percent 7% - 50 to 75 Percent
0% - 75 to 100 Percent. 89% - Less than 50 Percent
10). Does your business sponsor /support any recreational league
activities?
• 15% - Yes 8 5% - No (*)
( *) One no respondent reported that they sponsored /supported
hockey in the past
•
If yes, what activity?
Baseball /Hockey, Valley Sports Association -Hih School
Sports, V.A.A. and one said softball (not on a regular
basis)
11). Do you or any of your employees utilize any City park or
trail facilities during the business day (i.e., lunch break,
etc.)?
15% - Yes 85% - No
12). Do you or any of your employees utilize parks in other
cities during the business day or for business functions?
15% - Yes 85% - No
If yes, where?
City of Stillwater, City of Bayport, City of Somerset
(specifically waterslide location)
13). In the space following, please provide any general comments
you may have in regard to the relationship between community
businesses and the City's park and trail system.
"I haven't seen any park close to my business."
"We have no need to conduct business!"
"Parks are ok as is - forget the trails! A waste of our tax
money."
"Businesses should not influence the City's parks. It
should be the residents."
"A trail near a business would allow employees to utilize it
much easier before, during, and after work."
"A great benefit for the whole community."
a.
"We have limited use as a business, but our employees and
their families use them often for non- business events,
especially when their children are of grade school age."
14). What improvements /changes, if any, can be made to Oak Park
Heights' system of parks /trails /walkways /recreational areas
that would be useful to you or your employees?
"Most people have to go to a fast food place to get their
food. By the time they get that and go to a part to eat, it
is too late. I f you could put food trucks at different
parks, I think people .would go to then; and spend their
lunches and maybe bring their families there on the
weekend."
"A bike path /running path linking all area communities would
be useful and well used."
"Would like to see river trail from north of Stillwater to
Lakeland trails to Afton State Park."
"Maps."
"None. No "trail system" No more city taxes!"
"None! Save your money!"
"No idea."
"Distribute a one page map of all areas."
"Build a practice sand trap for golfers."
"Sidewalks in residential areas"
SUMMARY: 160 Surveys were mailed to local businesses. Three were
returned as undeliverable. 27 of the surveys were
received back for a 17% response back from our business
community.
•
LAW OFFICES OF
E
1.(
CKBERG, LAMMERS, BRIGGS, WOLFF & VIERLING, P.L.L.P.
1835 NORTHWESTERN AVENUE
STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082
LYLE J. ECKBERG (612) 439 -2878
JAMES F. LAMMERS '6 12) 439.2923
ROBERT G BRIGGS r+5..?
'3 �
PAUL A. WOLFF s • J
MARK J. VIERLING
GREGORY G. GALLER
KEVIN K. SHOEBERG
THOMAS J. WEIDNER
SUSAN D. OLSON September 22, 1995
THE HONORABLE BARBARA H O'NEAL MR MARK SWENSON
MAYOR OF CITY OF OAK PARK HTS 14846 UPPER 55TH ST
5495 OAK GREEN PLACE NORTH OAK PARK HTS MN 55082
OAK PARK HTS MN 55082
MR DAVID SCHAAF MS JANET ROBERT
6201 ST CROIX TRAIL N #121 6216 N LOOKOUT TRAIL
OAK PARK HTS MN 55082 OAK PARK HTS MN 55082
MR DEAN KERN SR
5885 OLDFIELD AVENUE NORTH
OAK PARK HTS MN 55082
RE: Proposed Modification of Oak Park Ordinances Affecting Park
Dedication Fees
Annexation Area Park
Planner's Report of 8/24/95
Dear Mayor and Council:
We have reviewed the Planner's Report of August 24, 1995,
affecting his analysis of the need to increase the Park Dedication
Fees which are assessed currently under the City's zoning and
subdivision codes.
State statute allows municipalities to promulgate rules for
the subdivision of land and to adopt regulations requiring that
portions thereof be dedicated to the public or preserved for public
use. With respect to park dedication, the statute allows cities to
adopt regulations that require "a reasonable portion" of any
proposed subdivision to be dedicated to the public or preserved for
conservation purposes or for public use as parks, "playgrounds,
tails, wetlands or open space."
Most, if not all, cities in Minnesota have enacted regulations
that take advantage of this enabling statute. In applying the
regulations, the cities have been generally aggressive in requiring
developers to dedicate land for public purposes throughout the
MAYOR and COUNCIL
Page Two
September 22, 1995
subdivision process. The statutory authority, as well as the
concept of municipal regulation requiring parkland dedication, has
long since been sustained by our Supreme Court in Collis v. City of
Bloomington, 310 Minn. 5 246 N.W.2d 19 (Minn. 1976). The battle
ground between developers and cities, over parkland dedication, has
been waged over statutory limitation, which allows municipalities
only to require "a reasonable portion" of the developer's land
which a municipality would reasonably require for parkland
purposes.
Up until recently, very few developers, following the decision
of the Minnesota Supreme Court in Collis took opportunity to
challenge the municipal requirement. In 1994 the situation changed
with the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Dolan v.
City of Tigard, 114 Supreme Court 2309 (1994). The Dolan decision
challenged the determination of the Oregon Supreme Court which held
that the City could reasonably impose the condition on approval
building permits on the dedication of portions of the developer's
property for flood control and traffic improvements. The State of
Oregon had also adopted the Comprehensive Land Use Management Plan
not dissimilar to the State of Minnesota and the City of Tigard
under the provisions of its Community Development Code adopted
under the authority of that statute, required property owners,
within the central business district, to comply with a 15% open
space in landscaping requirement on parcels that would be
developed. In a 5 to 4 decision, the United States Supreme Court
held that the city's dedication requirements, under its Ordinance,
constituted an uncompensated taking of property. The Supreme Court
required municipal ordinances to establish a "essential nexus"
between the interest to acquire the property and the property
owners need to obtain a permit from the city for the particular use
that it wishes to impose upon the property, i.e. whether the degree
of the municipal extraction for land dedication demanded by the
ordinance bears a required relationship to the projected impact of
the proposed development of the landowner.
The practical implications of the Dolan decision is that it
has changed the rules regarding parkland dedications and municipal
extractions from developers. Specifically, local government now
has the burden of proof to demonstrate that the degree of parkland
dedication or other extraction demanded by the permit condition,
bears the required relationship to the projected impact of the
proposed development. A municipal extraction from the developer
must be reasonably related both in nature and extent to the
proposed impact of the development.
MAYOR and COUNCIL
Page Three
September 22, 1995
To some extent, we must determine whether or not the demanded
parkland dedication, in each case, is roughly proportionate to the
proposed developments impact on the need to provide those municipal
facilities to the public. The Dolan case specifically provides
that no precise mathematical calculation is required, but that the
city must make a form of individualized determination that the
required dedication is both related in nature and extent to the
impact of the proposed development.
In this particular instance, the City Planner has recommended
that we revise the land dedication formula to a minimum of 100 of
the value of developable properties because the rate is consistent
with other communities. We would forewarn you, however, that under
the Dolan decision, it is probably not wise to base a land
dedication on the calculation on the assumption that a 10v
dedication will be required as that specific rate is not per se
valid under Dolan scrutiny. The test of reasonableness, if
required under judicial scrutiny, will not be limited to a fixed
percentage of land, which a subdivider is asked to dedicate, but
must include an analysis as to whether or not the subdivider's
contribution to the demand for public use of dedicated land within
the area is justified by the proposed development.
Of some concern, is a suggestion within the report that the
cash dedication amount for commercial and industrial property be
increased from $1,750.00 per acre to $3,000.00 per acre. The
Planner does note that many communities do not charge commercial
and industrial park development dedication fees, but the theory of
the charge is that business does generate demand for parks due in
part to league play or utilization by employees. We do not have
currently, within the proposal, any specific data regarding demand
or use generated by commercial or industrial development for
parkland purposes. Without that data, if a challenge would pursue
from a developer, it is unlikely that the city's proposal
increasing the park dedication demand on commercial and industrial
use would be sustained. Indeed, under the Dolan decision it is
unlikely that any municipal ordinance would survive judicial
scrutiny, if it were not supported by specific factual and
statistical analysis as to the demand placed upon the municipality
to provide parkland services by various developments.
The safest course for the City to pursue on any issue of
parkland dedication, either under the existing ordinance or under
any proposed amendment to it, would be to generate a specific study
that would reasonably estimate the demand for municipal services
and parkland demand generated by various types of development.
• F
MAYOR and COUNCIL
Page Four
September 22, 1995
This study could be based upon wide -based metropolitan data and
would not be limited or confined purely to the boarders of the City
of Oak Park Heights.
Additionally, if other cities have conducted similar studies,
the City could certainly utilize their analysis as part of its own
analysis in modifying the parkland dedication provisions of your
ordinances.
I would suggest to the Council that you establish a public
hearing before the City Council in November or December to deal
with the issue of parkland dedication, but also instruct the City
Planner to research what available studies have been completed by
other jurisdictions affecting the issues that the City is required
to address now under the Dolan decision and provide that
information back to the Council by written report. Additionally,
the City may wish to authorize the Planner to conduct its own study
with regard to reasonably attempting to assess the critical element
of the demand that is placed upon the City to provide parkland
dedication and related trails and services by residential,
commercial and industrial developments.
If you should have any questions in the matter, please feel
free to contact me directly.
Yours very truly,
1
Mark J. Vierling
MJV /smp
cc: Mr. Michael Robertson
Mr. Scott Richards L
v+ ._... „ vv 1 i I v , Mr\ FI1I T\ nG1 Uri IG -' G1G J» 70.. NU. iiJ tAU5
1995 PARR RESERVATIONS BY AREA ORGANIZATIONS
Brekke St. Croix Catholic - Picnic Gathering
St. Croix Valley Red Cross
Stillwater Community Education
Herberger's - Company Picnic
Valley View St. Paul Lutheran Church - Church Picnic
Salem Lutheran Church - Group Meetings
Stillwater B.P.W.
School District #834 - Picnic Meeting
Family Violence Network - Annual Picnic
Washington County Disabled American Vets -
Annual Picnic
Since most reservations are made under individuals' names, it is
possible that some additional organizations that we are not aware
of made use of our parks.
r
.;i
t.�
City of Oak Park Heights - Park Dedication Analysis
Metropolitan Area Comparison
November 1995
City/ Residential - Land Residential - Cash Commercial Industrial
Township Dedication Dedication Dedication Dedication
Afton 10% of gross land $2000 /residential $1500 /acre (there $1500 /acre (there
area being subdivided dwelling unit are no land are no land
requirements) requirements)
Baytown $300 /lot $300 /lot $300 /lot $300 /lot
Township
Buffalo One acre of land for $800 /unit for None None
every 75 persons the single family lots,
platted land could $800 /unit for two -
house based upon 3.5 family lots, and
persons per single $400 /unit for
family lot, 6 persons multiple family
per two - family lot, dwellings
and 1 person per
bedroom of multiple
family units
Chanhassen One acre of land for 10 percent of fair 10 percent of fair 10 percent of fair
every 75 persons the market value of market value of market value of
platted land could undeveloped undeveloped undeveloped
house based upon 3.0 property. property or 10 property or 10
persons per single percent of gross percent of gross
family, 6 persons per area being area being
two family lot, and 1 platted. platted.
person per bedroom
of multiple family
units.
Eagan The City has adopted $875 per single Land up to 7.5 % Land up to 7.5 %
a general standard of family unit, $791 of net land area of net land area
*See foot- 15 acres of land that per duplex unit, or .65 cents per or .65 cents per
note and is needed for every $723 per square square
attached 1000 residents, of townhouse or quad foot /$2831 per foot /$2831 per
copy of which 12 acres shall unit, and $726 per acre of net land acre of net land
subdivision be designated as park. apartment or area. A credit of area. A credit of
ordinance multiple family up to 25 % of the up to 25 % of the
section. unit. required required
This comm- 0 -1.9 units /ac =8% dedication may dedication may
unity has a > 1.9 units /ac =10% be allowed by the be allowed by the
very >3.5 units /ac =12 % City Council for City Council for
detailed >5.9 units /ac =14% stormwater stormwater
park and Add .5% for each control facilities. control facilities.
trail dedica- unit over 10
tion
process.
Eden Up to 10% of $945 /unit for all Up to 10% of the Up to 10% of the
Prairie subdivision area residential units subdivision land subdivision land
area or $3410 per area or $3410 per
acre cash acre cash
contribution contribution
Golden 10 percent of gross Equivalent cash 10 percent of 10 percent of
Valley land area being amount based on gross land area gross land area
subdivided fair market value being subdivided/ being subdivided/
of undeveloped equivalent cash equivalent cash
land amount based on amount based on
fair market value fair market value
of undeveloped of undeveloped
land land
Lakeville <2.5 units /ac =10% Single and 5% of gross 5% of gross
2.5 -4 units /ac =11% Multiple Family = land area or 5% land area or 5%
4 -6 units /ac =13 % $650 per dwelling of current market of current market
6 -8 units /ac =15 % unit value of value of
8 -10 units /ac =17% unimproved land unimproved land
10 +units /ac =17-20% as determined by as determined by
the County the County
Assessor Assessor
Minne- Reasonable portion of $400 /unit for 10% of gross 10% of gross
tonka gross land area being single family, land area or 10 land area or 20
subdivided, but not $300 /unit for cents per square cents per square
less than 10 percent townhomes & foot of building foot of building
duplexes, area area
$250 /unit for
apartments
Plymouth <2.0 dwelling units 1,150 per dwelling $3,850 per acre/ $3,850 per acre/
= 10% unit 10 percent of net 10 percent of net
2 -12 dwelling units = acreage acreage
10% + (actual
density - 2)
> 12 dwelling units
= 20% + (1/2 actual
density - 6)
St. Louis None None None None
Park
Stillwater 7% of gross land area 10% of County None None
Township Assessor's
unimproved value
of property
White Bear 10% of gross land $500 /unit for 10% of gross 10% of gross
Lake area single family, land area or 7% land area or 7%
$1000 /lot for two- of land value or of land value or
family lots, and $2500 /acre $2500 /acre
$325 /unit plus
$75 /bedroom (2 +)
for apartments and
other mult. family
Woodbury A reasonable portion A cash amount Same as for Same as for
in compliance with equivalent to the residential uses residential uses
comprehensive plan, amount of land
determined on a case- required,
by -case basis determined on a
case -by -case basis
r
* Eagan and Chanhassen are the only communities that have a separate trail dedication requirement
in addition to the above outlined park dedication requirements.
NOTE: With the exception of Eden Prairie, none of the aforementioned communities have
conducted substantiation studies relating to park sytem impact.
N NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
ENCLOSURE , o
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: 7 July 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Design Guidelines
FILE NO: 798.04 - 98.01
Please find attached a copy of the revised design guidelines reflecting comments from
Council Member Robert and the Planning Commission. I would suggest this preliminary
draft also be distributed to the entire Council for their review and comments. The Planning
Commission and City Council should also discuss the process for reviewing and checking
conformance with the guidelines. Some cities utilize a separate group as a Design Review
Board, others utilize the Planning Commission or City Council as the governing body on
design issues.
Based upon the comments of the Planning Commission and City Council, the design
guidelines will again be revised in anticipation of a Planning Commission hearing and a
discussion at their 20 August meeting.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2- 595 -9636 FAX 6 1 2- 595 -9837 E -MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
•■•• ..,..,.,. • .701,7•(.7 rayc 1. VI W
DESIGN GUIDELINES
OAK PARK HEIGHTS, MN DRAFT
JULY 1998
Purpose
The purpose of these guidelines is to coordinate design themes for site planning,
architecture, streetscape and signage of all commercial buildings for the area west
of Oakgreen Avenue, and south of Highway 36. This coordinated design of this
area will communicate an image of quality and stability. These standards are
intended to prevent the use of materials and practices that are unsightly, rapidly
deteriorate or contribute to depreciation of property values. It is not the intent
of these guidelines to unduly restrict design freedom. Proposed developments
which contradict any of the specific guidelines of this document will be reviewed
to see if the desired outcome is accomplished.
Process
Developers must submit plans and drawings to the City in accordance with the
Zoning Ordinance no fewer than twenty days prior to the Planning
Commission's next meeting in order to appear before the Planning Commission
for a public hearing. Submission materials shall include site plan, planting plan,
architectural plans and elevations, signage plans, and lighting plans. Perspective
sketches are desirable. Site and planting plans should include all existing and
proposed site elements. Architectural and sign plans should include elevations of
all exposed sides and identification of all materials and colors.
1
"tract I lme: 10.44.44
age po w
Site Design
The intent of the site design guidelines is to create efficient, attractive,
inviting spaces that complement public ROW as well as adjacent private
uses. Spaces that draw the eye and the user deeper into the site are
encouraged to avoid shallow "strip" development.
Issue Guideline
Unifying Design Concept All buildings and parking should be visibly
organized by a clear design concept.
Harmonious composition of numerous similar
or complementary forms encouraged.
Il II �I
Desirable Undesirable
Building Placement When possible, buildings should be placed with
long dimension perpendicular to highway or
street frontage. The end of the building should
be placed close to the highway or street with
minimal parking between. A recommended
maximum is 55 feet. This allows for one row
of parking, driveway, and landscaping between
building and highway.
• •••• ••- .,,....o. .... v.. v.. nn,aiuo vaac. II1170 I IRIe: 10.4.).Vd Page 14 01 14
Parking Placement When possible, the long dimension of the
primary parking area should be placed
perpendicular to the highway or street.
_ Highway
wOy _ _ _ — — _ _
Highway
F rontage ReTod — Frontooe Rood
1
Desirable Undesirable
Architecture
The intent of the architectural guidelines is to encourage thoughtful
consideration of each individual building use as it relates to its unique site
and surrounding sites to create a sense of identity that unique to Oak
Park Heights. The Stillwater Area High School is considered a key
component of this area and the continuation of the architectural style,
colors and materials is desired.
Custom Architecture Buildings and accessory structures shall be
designed specifically for the site and to relate to
the existing buildings around them and in the
area (style, color, materials, etc.). Franchise
architecture (building design that is
trademarked or identified with a particular
chain or corporation and is generic in nature) is
prohibited. Also prohibited are building color
wraps and neon.
3
.. •••. •.-- -••..� .,..,..... .... ..., va. n�nauo vaw. II IIVO I ITe: 10:4L:.3L P age 11 01 14
Facade and Roof Articulation Articulation of the facade and roof line is
encouraged.
J
L l I
Desirable Undesirable
Architectural Materials For the purposes of the subsection, materials
shall be divided into four grades as follows:
Grade I - a) brick
b) glass
c) natural stone
d) masonry stucco
e) copper panels
Grade II - a) concrete block with specialty
texture
b) architecturally precast textured
concrete panels
Grade III - a) exterior finish installation
system
b) opaque panels
c) ornamental metal
Grade IV - a) smooth or scored concrete
block
b) smooth concrete tip up panels
c) ceramic
d) glass block
e) wood
4
..... ... a .� ..o.c. 1/11a0 Hine. 10.41.7L e
r y i VI w
d
Buildings shall incorporate grades of materials
in all exterior walls in the following manner:
a) Office and commercial buildings must use at
least three Grade I materials and must be
composed of at least 65% Grade I or Grade
II materials. Glass must make up 30% of
this 65% (20% of building facade must be
glass); not more than 35% of Grade II or
Grade III material and not more than 10%
of the building shall be Grade IV materials.
b) Industrial and warehouse buildings must use
at least two different Grade I or II materials
and be composed of at least 65% Grade I or
Grade II materials; not more than 35%
Grade III or Grade IV materials. Not more
than 10% of the building shall be Grade IV
materials.
c) Multi- tenant office /warehouse or
showroom /warehouse or other
combinations shall be 65% Grade I
materials on primary exterior facades.
Exterior wall with limited public exposure
may use combinations of Grade II, III, or
IV materials.
d) Any expansions or additions to buildings
must use the same or superior materials as
the existing structure.
e) Any variations to these guidelines must be
approved by the City Council.
Composition & Detailing Buildings shall use a combination of at least 3
of the high quality materials.
No building should have large areas of blank
wall surface, i.e., without articulation of surface
or materials, visible from the street. A building
more than 20 feet in width should be divided
into increments of no more than 20 feet
through articulation of the facade. This can be
5
-•••• •..••. .... ., ..... • V. .il VLL nwnm u� Iddle. 111170 lime: 10:41:11 Page 7 01 14
achieved through combinations of the
following techniques:
• Divisions or breaks in materials (although
materials should be drawn from a common
palette):
• Window Bays;
• Separate entrances and entry treatments,
porticoes;
• Variation in roof lines;
• Awnings;
• Building setbacks.
;2
Desirable Undesirable
Color The exterior building color must blend with
the architecture in the area (primary reference -
Stillwater Area High School). The primary
exterior building color shall be soft, warm earth
tones - salmon, rose, tan, terra cotta, ochre.
Less than 30% may be soft, cool tones - gray,
green, blue. Less than 5% may be primary or
vivid colors.
Screening All roof, wall, and ground mounted
mechanical equipment and trash collection areas
shall be screened with material comparable and
compatible with the exterior building materials.
6
I VIII. VV.. =IOU nl IG L uI II ly I V. `lGUll 1[I{:I1arUS Idle: / / / /91S lime: lb:4U:43 rage O 01 14
Parking Lot Design
The intent of the streetscape guidelines is to create a unifying theme of
the functional elements common to all uses.
Lighting Site lighting will be in accordance with the
Zoning Ordinance and uniformly spaced,
"shoebox" style, dark bronze, metal halide on
dark bronze poles not to exceed 25 feet in
height and to provide an average of 3 foot
candles.
Parking Lot Islands Curbed islands of no less than 600 square feet
are encouraged in parking lots in lieu of several
smaller islands.
I I :I I CI
— Pill 11111111 H I 'I _ i _
_ i g - - 1 � I�
�l�lllllllll )flllllllllllllllllll�lf
Desirable Undesirable
Parking Lot Setback A landscaped buffer strip at least 8 feet wide
should be provided between all parking areas
and the public sidewalk or street. The buffer
strip shall consist of shade trees at a minimum
but also may include, shrubs, decorative fence
or masonry wall. A solid or opaque wall, fence
or hedge shall not exceed three feet in height.
7
• r O C y ... .,
Parking Lot Plantings Low shrubs and high- branching deciduous
trees are encouraged where needed to preserve
valuable site lines.
Low shrub masses of no less than 18 shrubs
per mass are encouraged in parking lot islands.
• . • iP
a au ou 8 I
• —
Desirable Undesirable
Plant Material Variety A mixture of plant material types is encouraged.
Desirable species are (but not limited to):
Deciduous trees -
White Ash /Fractions americana
Ginkgo /Ginkgo bilob a
Hackberry /Celtis occidentalis
Honeylocust /Gleditisa triacanthos and cultivars
Kentucky Coffeetree /Gyrnnocladus dioicus
Linden /Tilia sp. and cultivars
Norway Maple /Acer platanoides and cultivars
Red Maple /Acer rubrum
River Birch /Betula nigra
Sugar Maple /Acer saccharum
Pin Oak /Quercus palustris (acid soils)
Swamp White Oak /Quercus bicolor
8
........ ... ... ... .... .. ... �.r. n.7 .... ........ .......a.w vwc. l.iV IIIIIG. IV..Ia.L� rUSC N V$ 1.•
r
Coniferous trees:
Austrian Pine /Pinus nigra
Red Pine /Pinus resinosa
Scotch Pine /Pinus sylvestris
White Pine / Pinus strobus
Black Hills Spruce /Picea glauca densata
Colorado Spruce /Pinus pungens
Norway Spruce /Picea abies
White Spruce /Picea glauca
Deciduous shrubs: (Due to large variety of
species, only genus is suggested here):
Chokeberry, Coralberry Cotoneaster, Currant,
Dogwood, Euonymus, Forsythia, Honeysuckle,
Lilac, Ninebark, Potentilla, Rose, Snowberry,
Spirea, Sumac, Viburnum, Willow
Coniferous shrubs:
Juniper, Arborvitae, Yew, Pine
Prohibited trees:
Cottonwood (except for cottonless cultivars)
Female ginkgo
Boxelder
American elm (except for disease resistant
varieties)
Silver Maple
Mulberry
Black Locust
Willows
Black Walnut (unless given plenty of space)
Seeded varieties of Ash
9
...............� .,�,.... ....................a .....o. v...v.�.. raye .d ... •-•
Building Entrance Plantings Large sized trees are encouraged near the front
and entrance of buildings.
Pedestrian scale shrub planter areas within the
front walk are encouraged
Buildin _ Buildin __
Entrance ==— Entrance =
ddt lie Front Walk`'' / Front Walk =? __
Parking � )
Lot -
Parking - --
I - - - - -- Lot —a
Desirable Undesirable
Street Trees Street trees should be planted within a
landscaped boulevard, spaced a maximum of 50
feet apart. The averaged spacing between street
trees shall not exceed 40 feet apart.
Pedestrian /Bike Routes
Pedestrian and Bike Access Convenient access to the site for pedestrians
and bicycles shall be included, i.e., walkways,
signage, ramps, and bike racks. Bike rack
capacity of 4 bikes for every 20 vehicular
parking spaces should be provided in a visible
and preferably sheltered location.
Sidewalks shall be included on both sides of a
major entrance to a commercial use.
10
.. .... ..- .... - - -.. .� . -. -�.. .......o. ..a ..a•c. 111170 11111e. 10.40.V. . . v. ..
• I1
•
• • • •
MEMO �: �.
■ ■■■■u ■u■■ ■u III■■■N■ ■■
Desirable Undesirable
Comprehensive Trail Plan The site shall include trails segments and
connections in coordination with the City's
Comprehensive Trail Plan
Environment
Stormwater ponding On -site stormwater ponding shall be included
on each site appropriate to the size and runoff
characteristics of the site (as determined by an
engineer).
Side slopes of the on -site ponding shall not be
steeper than a 25% slope.
All impervious surfaces (with the exception of
bike /ped trails) shall be setback at least 100'
from the ordinary high water level of any
natural or manmade water bodies.
The side slopes and setback area around the
ponds shall be planted with appropriate native
shrubs and native grass mixtures.
Utilities
Utilities All utilities shall be placed underground.
11
1•••••• ray,:
./
' I
Signage
12
vn. vw anu rvuc ucunny I V. dbVU ni�na/cu Yale. III1.YO IIMe: 10:3 /:1)1 ( age L 01 14
Glossary
Building Frontage: The front facade of a building, typically abutting the
sidewalk.
Facade: The visible exterior walls of a building.
Fenestration: The arrangement of windows in a building.
Franchise Architecture: Building design that is trademarked or identified with
a particular chain or corporation and is generic in nature.
Impervious: Incapable of being penetrated by stormwater.
Native (plant materials): Plant materials indigenous to northern United States
and southern Canada.
Sign Types:
Stormwater: Any water that falls on and drains from a surface of the site, such
as snow, rain, irrigation, etc.
Streetscape: A public right of way, usually occupied by the street, boulevard,
sidewalks, etc.
Utilities: Public or semi -public services to private uses including sanitary sewer,
water, storm drainage, electricity, cable, telephone, and gas.
13
i
N
N ORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
tn6LU4URE ii
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: 7 July 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Comprehensive Plan Update
FILE NO: 798.06
As indicated at last month's Planning Commission meeting, we had indicated that the first
three sections of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Planning Tactics (Issue
Summary), Inventory and Policy Plan would be available. It is our intent to distribute these
plan sections at the Planning Commission meeting. We apologize that they are not
completed for distribution with the Planning Commission packet.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2- 595 -9636 FAX 6 1 2- 595 -9837 E -MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
N
INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
ENCLOSURE 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: 7 July 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Planning Seminars for Planning
Commission Members
FILE NO: 798.04 - 98.07
Please find attached information from the Government Training Service related to
upcoming Land Use Planning Seminars for Planning Commission training. As indicated,
"The Basic" program will be held at the State Planning Conference on 23 September 1998
in Bemidji. The State Conference, combined with the training session, would be an
excellent program for our new Planning Commissioners.
If any of the Planning Commission members are interested in this session (the conference
will start on 23 September and continue until the 25th), we should place them on the
mailing list. For those interested in the Spring workshops, we will put them on that list.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2- 595 -9636 FAX 6 1 2- 595 -9837 E -MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
fir: x
Gqvernment '
q nt Training Service
4 40 Cedar Street, Suite 401 • St. Paul, MN 55101 • (612) 222 -7409 • far (612) 223 -5307
Date: June 23, 1998 !
Contact: Tina Mlynarczyk ' 0`41"
litYe
Land Use Planning Update
We appreciate your interest in the Land Use Planning Seminars
offered by GTS this year. For those of you that were not able to
attend the Annual Planning Institute in March/April there will be
an additional program this fall. (This is only The Basics
portion of the Land Use Seminars.) This program will be held at
the Northern Inn in Bemidji on September 23, 1998, in conjuction
with the American Planning Institute's Annual Conference.
There will be no other planning programs presented until
February, March, and April of 1999. These spring programs will
be held in various metro and non -metro locations.
Below is a request to be placed on our mailing list for either or
both of our upcoming Land Use Seminars. You may mail or fax this
request in to the address and number above. Thank you for your
interest in our Annual Planning Institute.
Please Print
Name: Phone:(
Area Code
Address: Fax: ( )
Street Area Code
City State Zip
Please check the appropriate box or boxes: •
❑ Please put me on your mailing list for the Annual
Planning Institute held on September 23 in. Bemidji._
❑ Please put me on your mailing list for. the -1999 Springy
Land Use Planning Workshops to be held in various
locations.
•