04-417Council File # � 7 � �, �
creen sheet # '�l �
RESOLUTION
.�f
PAUL, MINNESOTA
ia
rr�en�a sy
Referred To
Committee: Date
�
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2]
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
WHEREAS, Grand Investors 2001 LLC [hereinafter "Grand LLC"], in Zoning File 03-
357-37�, made application for a site plan review pursuant to the provisions of Legislative Code
§ 62.108 for the purpose of constructing a mixed-use development on property legally described
as the Smmnit Park Addition, L.ots 4, 5 and Lot 6, Block 38, and commoniy known as 1060
Grand Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2003, the zoning committee of the planning commission
conducted a public hearing after providing notice and where all persons were given and
opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the zoning committee, based upon the evidence presented at the hearing and
the report of staff and all the testimony, recommended approval of the site plan submitted by
Grand LLC; and
WHEREAS, the full planning commission approved the said site plan, with conditions,
based upon the following findings of fact as set forth in planning commission resolution No. 04-
94 adopted on November 21, 2003:
"The site plan is consistent with the required findings in Section 62.108.c of the
Zoning Code.
1. The city's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for
sub areas of the city.
The Saint Paul Land Use Plan supports mixed-use developments such as
this: "In traditional neighborhoods, the City will support compatible mixed
use within single buildings and in separate buildings in close proximity.
Mixed use reduces transportation time and costs: '(2000 Land Use Plan,
page 27)
The Saint Paul Housing Plan supports "a sufficient density of housing and
related uses to support mass transit." (2000 Housing Use Plan, page 11)
The proposed building will be consistent with design guidelines in the
Comprehensive Plan: "Designs for new projects in pedestrian-oriented
areas should include buildings out to the sidewalk, parking that is not in
front of the building and is screened, windows facing the sidewalk and
architecture that respects the neighborhood context." (2000 Land Use
Plan, page 27)
2. Applicable ordinances of the City of Saint Paul.
2
O�f- y17
3 The site plan will provide 139 off-street parking spaces plus a bicycle rack.
4 This is enough parking to meet the parking requirements of Section 62103
5 far 29 condos pius various mixes of commerciai use of the first floor
6 including retail, restaurant and office. Examples include:
8 •
9
10 •
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
The entire first floor could be used for retail
The first floor could be used for retail with a 5,000 squaze foot
restaurant (with beer and wine) or a 3,400 squaze foot restaurant
(with liquor).
The building will meet the height requirements. Section 61.103 permits
buildings to be up to 30 feet high plus an additional foot for each foot the
building is set back. The proposed building will be 47 feet tall measured
to the surface of the roof but the upper floors will be set back to meet the
height requirement. The building will also meet requirements for floor
area ratio of 2.0.
The delivery and trash areas located behind the building in the parking lot
will comply with the requirements of Section 61.105. Most trucks will be
able to get to the delivery area from a driveway located on Grand Avenue
and leave via Oxford. For larger trucks, a gate will be provided along the
alley so trucks can get to the loading area. The gate will only be open a
limited number of hours a day.
3. Preservation of unique geologic, geographic or historically significant
characteristics of the city and environmentally sensitive areas.
The site plan will preserve and enhance the historic character of Grand
Avenue by locating the building up at the sidewalk and loca6ng the
parking behind the building and underground.
If any fuel tanks from an old gas station are found buried on the site, they
will be handled according to established city and state regulations.
4. Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable
provision for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers,
preservation of views, light and air, and those aspects of design which may have
substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
Drainage will be directed at a controlled rate to an existing public storm
sewer in the ailey.
Parking behind the building will be screened along the alley by a fence.
It will not impact views, light or air. The building will be setback betweex
50 and 60 feet from the ailey and the upper floors will be setback from the
street and adjacent property.
Page 2 of 5
Rooxn wiil be provided in the parking lot behind the building for deliveries
and trash pick-up so that trucks would not block the alley. A gate is
3 proposed to allow tmcks to come in from the alley if they aze too large to
4 use the Crrand Avenue driveway. Hours when this gate is open should be
5 limited to 8 a.m. to Noon, Monday through Friday and 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. on
6
7
Saturday.
8 The developers have been working with the Saint Paul Design Center to
9 refine design of the building and the facade to ensure that it fits into the
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
neighborhood.
The adjacent building to the west is on the property line next to the Grand
Avenue driveway. Steps need to be taken to protect the comer of the
building and keep trucks from hitting it when they enter the site.
5. The arrangement of buildings, uses and facilities of the proposed development
in order to assure abutting property and/or its occupants will not be
unreasonably affected.
The setback for the building wifl minimize its impact on abutting property.
Deliveries and trash pick up have been designed to minimize the impact
on the alley and neazby properties.
6. Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and location,
orientation and elevation of structures.
The site plan is consistent with current practices and standards for energy-
conservation.
Locating a mixed use development on a street with good bus service will
encourage energy conservation by giving residents the option of using the
bus instead of driving their cars.
7. Safety and convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic both within the
site and in relation to access streets, including traffic circulation features, the
locations and design of entrances and exits and parking areas within the site.
Public Works Traffic Division has reviewed the site plan and concluded
that the amount of traffic generated by the proposed development is
acceptable and can be handled by the neazby streets. The current proposal
would generate fewer daily trips than the earlier proposal for a one-story
building with parking on the roof under a number of different development
scenarios.
8. The satisfactory availabtility and capaciry of storm and sanitary sewers,
including solutions to any drainage problems in the area af the development.
The site plan is consistent with this finding. Storm water from the roof
will be directed at a controlled rate to the existing public storm sewet in
o�f- y��
Page 3 of 5
oy- yi�
the alley which has adequate capacity. (The site currently surface drains to
the alley and to Grand Avenue.) Sanitary sewer and water are available in
Grand Avenue.
�
9. Sufficient parking, fences, walls ¢nd Zandscaping, necessary to meet the above
objectives.
8 Parking - The development will provide a total of 139 off-street pazking
9 spaces (32 behind the buiiding and 107 beneath the building) plus two
10 bicycle racks. This is enou� pazking to meet the code for commercial use
11 of the first floor, including a 5,000 square foot restaurant (with beer and
12 wine) and 29 condominium units.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Landscaping and fences - New shade trees will be planted in the sidewalk
on Grand and Oxford. The plan also calls for using decorative pavers as
accents in the public sidewalk along Grand and Oxford. A 4' wide
landscaped strip and screening fence is planned along the alley.
10. Site accessibility in accordance with the provisfons of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA), including parking spaces, passenger loading zones and
accessible routes.
Site accessibility, including provision of accessible parking spaces, will be
provided as required by the ADA.
11. Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey
Erosion Sediment and Control Handbook. "
Standard construction practices will be required to keep sediment from
being tracked off site or being carried into the storm sewer during
construction."
WHEREAS, on December 5, 2003, Andrea M. Hauser, pursuant to Legislative Code §
64.206, duly filed an appeal from the decision of the planning commission and requested a public
hearing before the City Council for the purpose of reviewing the decision of the said
commission; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to I.egislative Code §§ 64.206 - 208, and upon notice to affected
parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on December 17, 2003, where
all parties were given an opportunity to be heard and, at the close of the hearing, the City
Council, having heard the statements made and having considered the application, the report of
staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the zoning committee and of the full planning
commission does hereby;
RESOLVE, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby denies the appeal of Andrea
M. Hauser there being no showing of error on the part of the planning commission in its review
of the said site plan and with respect to the height of the proposed building or the traffic impact
of the propsed development as depicted in the site plan; and
Page 4 of 5
D�!— yl7
1 BE IT FURTFIER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Andrea M. Hauser is hereby denied;
2 and
3
4 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution
5 to Andrea Hauser, Grand Investors 2001 LLC, the zoning administrator and the planning
6 commission.
Adoption Cert{��ied by Council Secretary
BY� L
Uh' ��X �
Approved or: Date
By: _
Requested by Department of:
�/�P
s,,: �� �, �
Adopted by Council: Date �i% ��cT�O�.�
Form Approved by City Attorney
� Green Sheet Green
o�t- y�7
Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
Departrnent/officelwuncil: Date Initiated:
� -L,���;o���n�t �-�R� Green Sheet NO: 3014495
CoMact Person 8 Phone: ���ent Sent To Person In tia
Peter Wamer � 0 'cense/Ins ctio nviron Pro G��
266-8��0 Assign 1 �censellnsnecbon/EnvirovPro DeoaRmentDireMOr
Must Be on Councii Agenda by (Date): Number 2 • Attorne
For
RoU60g 3 or's Office Ma odASSis�nt
OMe� 4 ouocil
5 ' Clerk i Ci Clerk
Total # of Signature Pages _(Ciip AII Locatio�s for Signature)
Action Requested:
Council approval of a resoluUon memorializing previous council acrion denying the appeal of Andrea Hauser (Zoning File #03-409252)
to overhun the Planning Commission's approval of a site plan for a mixed use development at the SW Comer of Grand Avenue and
O�'ord Street.
Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personat Service ConUacts Must Answer the Following Giuestions:
Planning Commission t. Has this personffirm ever worked under a contract for this department?
CIB Committee Yes No , �
� Civil Service Commission 2. Has this personffirm ever been a city employee? �
Yea No
� 3. Does this personffirm possess a skill not normally passessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
� Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
Grand Investors 2001 LZC, after nego6a6ons with the Summit Hill Qssociation and `design assistance from the Saint Paul Design
Center, submitted arevised site plan that was approved by the Plauniug Cominission. It's approval was appealed to the City Council by
Andrea I3auser. The Council heazd the appeal and voted to deny it on December 17, 2003.
Advantapes If Approved: ,
Disadvantapes If Approved: { '
APR Q 5 2004
MAYOR'S OFFICE
DisadvanWges If NotApproved:
Total Amount of Cost/Revenue Budgeted:
Transaction: �� �cc°�r.�� �+^��F:sp
Funding Source: Activity Number.
Financial Information: AP� � � `��Q�
(F�cplain)
12/03/2003 11'38 FAH 6312669099
CITV OF ST.PAUL OFCJLIEP
OFFICE OF LICFSISE, WSPECTIONS AND
bM�IRONMENI'AL PRO'IL•C110N
Jmieen E. Rosas, Dtrcaor
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
RandyC. Kel1y, Mayor
December 2, 2003
Ms. Mary Erickson
Ciry Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City hail
Sain[ Paul, MN 55�02
RE: Public hearing date
Deat Ms. Erickson:
� 002/002
o�- yi�
LO3YRYPROF.FSSIONALBUILDING 7elepfione: 657-266-9090
3505/.Pe�trSvice�,Suils300 Fnaiinite� 651-Z66-9124
Satnrvoul,Mlnncmw5570Y-ISJO Web: +vww.cl.s7yau[mnus/liep
I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday,
December 17, 2003, on the fo2lowing appeal of a decision by the Planning Commission.
F�e Number: 03-357370
Peu'pose: Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a site plan for a mixed-use
development. The sice plan calls for commercial space on the first floor and
29 condominiums on three floors above. Pazking would be in che basemern
and in a loc behind the building.
Address:
AppeLant:
Legal Descrip5on
of Property:
1060 Grand Avenue
Andrea Hauser
Lots 4, 5, and 6, Biock 38,Summit Pazk Addidon
Previous Actions: The Planning Commission approved the site plan on a vote of 140.1on
November 21, 2003.
The Zoni�g Commiuee recommended approval of the site plan on a vote of
4-0 on Novamber 13, 2003.
I have confirmed this dace wi�h Councilmember Coleman. My understand'mg is chat you wi11 publish
notice of [he heazing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Please call me at 266-9086 if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
��'�
Tom Beach
ZOiling SpeClalist
cc: Pile
AA-ADA-EEO L•mpinycr
MOTICE OF PUBLIC AEARING
� The Saint Paul City Council ,wi31. con-
duct a public hearing on Wednesday, De-
cember l7, 2003, a-t 5:30 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers, Third Floor, City I3a11
to consider the appeal of Andrea Hauser
regarding the Planning Commission's ap-
proval of a site pIan for a mised-use dedel-
opment at 1060 Grand Avenue. �
Dated: December 2, 2003 , ,
MARY ER�CKSOJ�T„ � - '
Assistant city councfl Secretary
(December �
__"__= 3T PA11L LEGAL LEDGER'=—==___
22073408 .. . �
Dy-N�?
�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, iblayor
OFFICE OF LICENSE, IlVSPECT10N5 AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT[ON
Roger Curns, Director
LOWRYPROFESSIOA'ALBUILDITIG Telephone: 651-266-9090
350 St. Peter Street, Suite 300 Facsimile 6.i]-266-9124
SaintPaul,Mmnesota3i10?-I510 Web: i+nv�v.c+.stpaul.mn.us(liep
December 9, 2003
Ms. Mary Erickson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
15 Kellogg Blvd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Site plan review for mixed-use development at 1060 Grand Avenue
Zoning File 03-409252
Dear Ms. Erickson:
A public hearing has been scheduled for Wednesday, December 17, 2003 to consider an appeal by
Andrea Hauser of the Planning Commission's decision to approve fl�e site plan for a new mixed-use
• development at 1060 Grand Avenue.
The site plan
The site plan calls far a new mixed-use building with 22,274 square feet of commercial space on the first
floor and 29 condominiums on three floors above. The building would be 47 feet tall to surface of the
roof with a parapet extending another foot. The upper floors of the building would be stepped back from
the street. The first floor of the building would be set up to the sidewalk on Grand and on Oxford and
would be set back approximately 60 feet from the alley.
Off-street parking would be provided under the building (107 spaces) and in a surface parking lot behind
the building (32 spaces).
enter the site from Grand Avenue and would not need to use the alley for access.
There would be a driveway on Oxford and an"in-only" driveway on Grand. An area for deliveries and
trash pickup would be provided in the pazking lot behind the building. Most trucks would be able to
The Planing Commission approved the site plan
On November 21, 2003, the Planning Commission approved the site plan on a vote of 14-0-1 with the
conditions that prohibit fast food restaurants and limit the hours that delivery trucks can use the alley.
On November 13, 2003, the Zoning Committee held a public hearing, and recommended approval on a
vote of 4-0. At the public hearing 6 people spoke in opposition and 14 people sent letters in opposition.
Staff from LIEP and Public Works Traffic Engineering recommend approval.
�
r „,
�� : , i s
An appeal has been filed
Andrea Hauser of 1055 Lincoln Avenue filed an appeal of the Planning Comiiri'ssion's decision. The
appeal lists four grounds for the appeal:
Floor Area Ratio
The four story structure with under�ound parking exceeds the masimum allowed density for Zone
B-2 because The Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R) exceeds 2.0. Code Section 6I. t03(d); Section 60.219
(definition of shucture}. The development can have no more than 83,200 sq. ft. for all buildings and
structures as the loYs area is 41,600 sq. ft. (depth of 160 ft. by street frontage of 260 ft.).
2. Traffic
The conclusion that Oxford Street, a non-MSA two-lane street can handle traffic generated by
22,000 sq. ft, of retaii space and 29 condominiums is in error where cunently, at Ieast 45% of
vehicles now exiting the alley between Grand and Lincoin go south of Oxford into the neighborhood
to avoid congestion on Crrand Avenue.
3. Building height
With a height of 48 feet, the building lacks the requisite 18 foot setbacks from all property lines.
Buildings exceeding 30 feet in height in a B-2 zone must have a one foot setback from all property
]ines for every foot over 30 feet. Section 61103(d)' Secrion 60.219S (definition of setback).
4. Parking
The Site Plan lacks a prohibition against charging the public for pazking in the underground parkzng
gazage although a parking gazage where the public is charged a fee is a permitted use in Zones B-4
and B-5 only under Code Sections 60.572 and 417.02 (definition of parking lot or building).
I have enclosed a summary of staff's response to the grounds for appeal.
Please notify me if any member of the CiTy Council wishes to have slides of the site presented at the
public heazing.
Sincerely,
� �� .
Tom Beach
ATTACIINIENTS
Appeal by Andrea Hauser
Staff response to appeal
Planning Commission resolution
Zoning Committee minutes
Staff report far Zoning Committee
Letters in support and opposition
Proposed development (drawings and plan)
Site (photo and location maps
page 1
page 3
page 5
page 8
page 10
page 17
page 35
page 41
�
•
•
HP�CONIMO�^Site PIan�Big pro�eccs`,Oi35T70 mand ox 2\city council appeal cover letter.wpd
oy y��
SnINT
PAUL
R � I i
Zoning ofFice use only -.
File # D3 �(C39Z5 L . ,
t�� Fee:� � s --'
Tentative Hearing Date: �J
�C Ec'_ , ( `7, 2v`t3�
Name Andrea M. Hauser
1055 Lincoln Avenue
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
Deparhnent of Planning and Economic Development
Zoning Section
I400 City HaZt Annex
25 West Fourth Street
Saint Paul, MN SSIO2-1634
(65I) 266-6589
APPLICANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
City St. Paul St. MN Zip 55105 Daytime Phone (952) 890-0888
(651) 227-6791
Zoning File Name Grand Investors 2001 LLC
! Address/Location 1050 and 1060 Grand Avenue, St. Paul '
i
TYPE OF APPEAL: Application is hereby made for an appeal to the:
� Board of Zoning Appeals � City Council
Under the provision of Chapter 64, Section 2�6 Paragraph �a� of the Zoning Code, fo appeal a
decision made by Yhe St. Paul Planning Commission
on November 21 20 . File Number:
(date of decision)
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL:
SEE ATTACHED SAEET
Explain why you feel#here has been an error in any requirement, permit, decisian
oe refusal made by an administrative official, or an error in fact, procedure or
findang made by the Board of Zoesing Appeals or the Planning Commissian.
r�
��
(attach additional sheet if necessary)
�^ ,
ApplieanYs Signa#uref �'� ��� _ �1,� Date �''F , �---�' �c.����iCity
�� � ., � �
Basis for Appeal of Planning Commission Resofution 03-94
The four story structure with underground parking exceeds the maximum allowed density
for Zone B-2 because the Floor Area Ratia (F.A.R..} exceeds 2.0. Cade Section 61.1Q3(d);
Section 60.219 ((definifion of struchu The develogtnent can have no more than $3,200
sq. ft. for all buildings and structures as the lot's total azea is 41,600 sq. ft. (depth of 16Q
8. by street frontage of 260 ft.).
2. The concIusion that Oxford Street, a non-MSA two-lane street, can handle traffic
generated by 22,000 sq. ft of retail space and 29 condominiums is in error where currenfly,
at least 45% of vehicles cars now e�ting the alley between Grand and Lincoin go soutfi on
Oxford into the neighborhood to avoid congestion on Grand Avenue.
With a height of 48 feet, the building tacks the requisite 18 foot setbacks from all
property lines. Buildings exceeding 30 feet in height in a B-2 zone must have a one foot
setback from all properiy lines for every foot over 30 feet. Code. Section 61.103(d);
Section 60.219 S(definition of setback).
!
4. The Site Plan lacks a prohibition against charging the public for parking in the
underground parking garage, although a parking garage where the public is chazged a fee is
a pernutted use in Zones B-4 and $-5 only under Code Sections 60.572 and 417.02
(defuution of pazking lot or building). �
.
OFFiCE OF LICENSE, INSPEC710NS AND�� �E '�
ENVIItONMENTAL PROTECTION "' �° � '� - "
Janeen E. Rosas, Drrector "
•
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Randy C. KeRy, Mayor
LOWRYPROFESSIOA'.9LBUILDI,4�G Te[ephane: 651-266-4090
350 St. Pe1er Stree[, Sui[e 300 Fucsimiie. 657-26b-9t24
SaintPaul,MinnesotaiJ102-IJIO Web: wivw.cistpauLmn.us/liep
DATE: 12/9103
TO: City Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Beach
RE: Grounds for appeal of the Grand and Oxford site plan
I have prepazed a response to each of tlie grounds given in the appeal of the Planning Commission's
approval of the Grand and Oxford site plan. Sections of the code referenced are listed at the end.
1. Floor Area Ratio
The appeal states: The four story structure with underground parking exceeds the masimum allowed
density for Zone B-2 because the Floor Area Ratio (P.A.R) exceeds 2.0. Code Section 61.103(d);
Section 60.219 (definition of structure). The development can have no more than 83,200 sq. ft. for all
buildings and stmctures as the IoYs area is 41,600 sq. ft. (depth of 160 ft. by street frontage of 260 ft.).
Staff response: Staff agrees that the allowable floor area for the project is 83,200 s9uare feet.
However, the definition of floor area in the zoning code excludes unfinished basements and sperce
� used for off-street parking and based ora this the floor area for the building is less than 83,200 square
feet.
2. Traffic
The appeal states: The conclusion that O�ord Street, a non-MSA two-lane streei can I�andle traffic
generated by 22,000 sq. ft. of retail space and 29 condominiums is in error where currently,_at least
45% of vehicles now exiting the alley between Grand and Lincoin go south of Oxford into the
neighborhood to avoid congestion on Grand Avenue.
•
Staff response. Patblic Works Trafftc Engineering staff reviewed the site plan and ot the request of
the Planning Commission conducted their own traffc study. They concluded that Oxford and the
intersection at Grand coz�ld haradle the increased traffc that would be generated by this development
and that the impact of tra�c on the neighboring residential area was acceptable.
Building height
The appeal states: With a height of 48 feet, the building lacks the requisite 18 foot setbacks from all
properry lines. Buildings exceeding 30 feet in height in a B-2 zone must have a one foot setback from
all property lines for every foot over 30 feet. Section 61.103(d) Section 60.2195 (definition of
setback).
Staff response: For this project and for others in the past, staff has applied the setback requirements
only to the portions of the building that are higher than the 30 foot hedght limit and has not appZied
the setback to the parfions of the building thaf crre lower than 30 feet. This building meets that
standard: the first floor is up to the sidewalk baet the ¢epper floors are stepped back from the property
line so that each floor is setback at Zeast one foot for every foot that it is taller thcm 30 feet.
`�
e
� � • �
�< c„
a
4. Parking �
The appeal staTes: The Site Plan lacks a prohibition againsY charging the pubiic for parking in the
underground pazking garage although a parking garage where the public is charged a fee is a permitted .
use in Zones B-4 and B-5 only under Code Sections 60.572 and 417.02 (definition of parking lot or
building).
Staff response: The Sections of the Legislative Code mentioned in the appeal do not prohibit
charging for parking in the B-2 Zoning District and the City Council has approved at Zeast hvo other
parking ramps that charge for parking in the B-2 Zoning District: one in Highland Village and one at
Grand and Victoria.. (The developer says he has not determined yet if he will charge for parking and
it will depend in part on the tenants for the building.)
Code references
Accessory parking Accessory off-street pazking spaces, open or enclosed, subject to the accessory off-
street parking regulations for the district in which the zoning lot is located. (Secrion 60.201.A)
Accessory parking is a permitted use in the B-2 zoning district.
FZoor area. The sum of the horizontal areas of each floor of a building, measured from the interior
faces of the exterior walls or from the centerline of walls separating two (2) buildings. The floor azea
measurement is exclusive of azeas of basements, unfinished aYTics, attached garages, or space used for off-
street parking or loading, breezeways, and enclosed and unenclosed porches, elevator or stair bulkheads
and accessory structures. (Section 60.206.F)
F1oor arecr ratio (F.A.R.) The ToYal floor area of al1 bulldings or structures on a zoaing lot divided by the �
area of said lot. (Section 60.206.F)
Setbacks and buiZding height The height of the structure may exceed the maximum building
height allowed in the district, provided the structure is set back from ail setback lines a distance
equal to the height which said structure exceeds the maximum buiiding height allowed in the
district. (Section 61103.d)
Structure. Anything constructed or erected, the use of which requires location on the ground or
attachment to something having location on the ground. (Section 60219.5)
H\COhIMON�S�rePIan�Hig projecu\033513i0 yand ox 24espome to appeal wpd
�
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
�
�
�
City of Saint Paul
Planning Commission Resolution
File Number 03 -94
Date November 21. 2003
�
� _ - _ �� �
WHEREAS, Grand Investors 2001 LLC, File # 03-357-370, has applied for a site pian review under the
provisions of 62.108 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, for a new mixed-use development on property
located at 1060 Grand Avenue, Iegally described as Summit Park Addition, Lots 4, 5 and Lot 6, Block 38;
and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission, on 11/13/03, held a public hearing at
which ali persons present were given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to said application in accordance
with the requirements of §64.300 of the Saint Paui Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, based on the evidence presented to its Zoning
Committee at the pubiic hearing as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of
fact:
The site plan is consistent with the required findings in Section 62.108.c of the Zoning Code:
1. The city's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas of the city.
The Saint Paul Land Use Plan supports mixed-use developments such as this: "In traditionai
neighborhoods, the City will support compatible mixed use within single buildings and in separate
buildings in close proximity. Mixed use reduces transportation time and costs." (2000 Land Use
Plan page 27)
The Saint Paul Housing Plan supports "a sufficient density of housing and related uses to support mass
transit." (2000 Housing Plan page 11)
The proposed building will be consistent with design guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan: "Designs
for new pro}ects in pedestrian-oriented areas should include bui�dings out to the sidewalk, parking that is
not in front of the building and is screened, windows facing the sidewaik and architecture that respects
the neighborhood conte�." (2000 Land Use Plan page 27)
2. Applicable ordinances of the City of Saint Paul.
The site pian will provide 139 off-street parking spaces plus a bicycle rack. This is enough parking to
meet the parking requirements of Section 62.103 for 29 condos plus various mixes of commercial use
of the first floor inciuding retail, restaurant and office. Examples include:
- The entire first floor could be used for retail
i
- The first floor could be used for retail with a 5,000 square foot restaurant (with beer and wine) or a
3,400 square foot restaurant (with liquor).
The building wiil meet the height requirements. Section 61.103 permits buildings to be up to 30 feet
high plus an additional foot for each foot the building is set back. The proposed building wili be 47 feet
moved by tcramer
seconded by
in favor
against
14-0 with 1 abstention �Alton�
.�
Zoning File #03-357-370 {4 _
��� � �_-
November21, 3003, Planning Commission Resolution �
Page 2 �
tall measured to the surface of the roof but the upper floors wili be set back to meet the height ,-
requirement. The building wili also meet requirements for floor area ratio of 2.0.
The delivery and trash areas located behind the building in the parking lot will comply with the
requirements of Section 61.105. Most trucks wili be abie to get to the delivery area from a driveway
located on Grand Avenue and leave via O�ord. For larger trucks, a gate will be provided along the
ailey so trucks can get to the Ioading area. The gate will only be open a limited number of hours a day.
3. Preservation of unipue geologic, geographic or historically significant characteristics of the city and
Environmentally sensitive areas.
The site plan will preserve and enhance the historic character of Grand Avenue by locating the building
up at the sidewalk and locating the parking behind the building and underground.
If any fuel tanks from an old gas station are found buried on the site, they will be handled according to
established city and state regulations.
4. Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonab/e provision for such matters as
surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation oi views, light and air, and those aspects
of design which may have substantial eSects on neighboring land uses.
Drainage will be directed at a controlled rate to an existing pubiic storm sewer in the ailey.
Parking behind the building will be screened along the alley by a fence.
It wiil not impact views, light or air. The buiiding wiil be setback between 50 and 60 feet from the alley
and the upper floors will be setback from the street and adjacent property. i
'!
Room wili be provided in the parking lot behind the building for deliveries and trash pick-up so that
trucks would not block the alley. A gate is proposed to allow trucks to come in from the alley if they are
too large to use the Grand Avenue driveway. Hours when this gate is open should be limited to 8 AM to
Noon Monday through Friday and 8 AM to 10 AM on Saturday.
The developers have been working with the Saint Paul Design Center to refine design of the building
and the facade to ensure that it fits info fhe neighborhood.
The adjacent building to the west is on the property line next to the Grand Avenue driveway. Steps
need to be taken to protect the corner of the building and keep trucks from hitting it when they enter the
site.
5. The arrangement of burldings, uses and facilities of the proposed development in order to assure
abutting property and/or its occupants will not be unreasonably affected.
The setback for the building will minimize its impact on abutting property.
Detiveries and frash pick up have been designed to minimize the impact on the affey and nearby
properties.
6. Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and location, orientation and elevation of
structures.
The site plan is consistent with current practices and standards for energy-conservation.
Locating a mixed use development on a street with good bus service will encourage energy
conservation by giving residents the option of using the bus instead of driving their cars. �
7. Safety and convenience oi both vehicular and pedestrian traffic both wrthin the site and in relation to
access streets, including tratfic crrculation features, the locations and desrgn of entrances and exits and
parking areas within the site.
�
Zoning File #03-357-370
November 21, 30D3, Planning Commission Resolution
� Page 3
� f �R ! - v �
Q
Public Works 7raffic Division has reviewed the site plan and concluded that fhe amount of traffic
generated by the proposed development is acceptable and can be handled by the nearby streets. The
current proposal would generate fewer daily trips than the earlier proposal for a one-story building with
parking on the roof under a number of different development scenarios.
8. The satisfactory availability and capacity of storm and sanitary sewers, including solutions to any
drainage problems in the area of the development.
The site plan is consistent with this finding. Storm water from the roof wiil be directed at a controlled
rate to the existing public storm sewer in the al{ey which has adequate capacity. (The site currently
surface drains to the alley and to Grand Avenue.) Sanitary sewer and water are available in Grand
Avenue.
9. Sufficient parking, fences, walls and iandscaping, necessary to meet the above objectives.
Parking - The development will provide a tota{ of 139 ofE-street parking spaces ( 32 behind the building
and 107 beneath the building) plus two bicycle racks. This is enough parking to meet the code for
commercial use of the first floor, including a 5,000 square foot restaurant (with beer and wine) and 29
condominium units.
Landscaping and fences - New shade trees will be planted in the sidewalk on Grand and Oxford. The
pian also calfs for using decorative pavers as accents in the public sidewalk along Grand and Oxford.
A 4' wide landscaped strip and screening fence is planned along the alley
� 10. Site accessibility in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilitres Act (ADA),
including parking spaces, passenger loading zones and accessible routes.
Site accessibifity, including provision of accessibfe parking spaces, wiVl be provided as required
by the ADA.
11. Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey Erosion Sediment and
Control Handbook. "
Sta�dard construction practices will be required to keep sediment from being tracked off site ar
being carried into the storm sewer during construction.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, under the authority of
the City's Legislative Code, that the application of Grand Investors 2001 LLC for a site plan review for a new
mixed-use development at 1060 Grand Ave is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. The gate in the fence along the alley for truck deliveries may open be only from the hours of 8 AM to
Noon Monday through Friday and 8 AM to 10 AM on Saturday.
2. Final plans must be submitted showing measures to be taken to protect the corner of the building to the
west and keep trucks from hitting it when they enter the site.
3. If any fuel tanks are found buried on the site, they must be handled according to established city and
state regulations.
4. Final plans with additional detail for storm water drainage, utilities, sidewalk paving, landscaping and
erosion/sediment control must be submitted and approved by City staff.
� 5. No fast food restaurants are permitted in the development.
�
,
MINUTES OF THE ZONING COMMITTEE
Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 3:30 p.m.
City Council Chambers, 3rd Floor
City Hall and Court Hause
15 West Keilogg Boulevard
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
STAFF:
Faricy, Field, Kramer, and Morton
Alton, Anfang, Gordon, and Mejia
Tom Beach, Carol Martineau Allen Torstenso�
The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Field.
� °� �: "�
�
�
Grand Investors 2009, LLC- 03-357-370 - Site plan review for a mixed-use development. The proposa!
has been changed to a 4-story building with Iess commerciai space on the first floor than in the
original proposai, 29 condominium units in the fioors above and parking in the basement and behind.
1060 Grand Ave., SW corner at Oxford.
Tom Beach presented the staff report with a recommendafion of approval for the Site Plan Review. He said
that the Summit HIII Association reviewed the plan and they recommended approval of the plan subject to
conditions. He also received 13 e-mails in opposition.
Brad McNaught, Grand Investors 2001, highlighted the differences between this project and the previous
project and explained why the project was changed.
Jim Harrison, Chairman of the Summit Hili Association (District 16 Council), stated that their Committee on a
vote of 7-1 with one abstention voted to support the project as presented and requested that the conditions
presented by District 16 become part of the site pian. He also requested that if there were any significant
changes as a result of further action at the City level, District 16 would be given a chance to interact with the
project.
David M. Gorg, 1061 Lincoln Ave., explained that he supports the concept of the proposal but the buiiding
height is out-of-scale with the rest of the neighborhood. He also gave the heights of a number of buildings to
reiterate his point and submitted a scale of what the project would look like in regards to height.
�
Amy Levine, 1068 Lincoln Ave., suggested that the Committee take a careful look and not take on faith any
information that is provided without getting full proof. The building, including the parapet, is 48 feet not 45 feet
fail. The proposed building wouid effectively dwarf everything else on the b(ock. It is offensive because of its
height and bulk and none of the other apartment buildings displayed are ciose to 258 ft. wide. The impact of
the building would make the street dark and it would feel like a concrete corridor such as the case in
downtown St. Paul or in New York or Chicago. If you obliterate the historical nature of the area and make it
shadowed and darker pedestrians would not want to walk there. If the building comes clear to the sidewalk
line at the corner of Oxford and Grand and there is a bus shelter there it wouid make for an extremely
cramped corner.
At the question of Commissioner Field, Ms. Levine stated the bus stop should not be eliminated but to make a
wider sidewalk at that corner.
Ms. levine also stated that the traffic report was faulty because when the traffic on Oxford was assessed by �
an independent company it was done over the Fourth-of-July weekend for a very brief period of time at the
least traffic time of year when no schools were in sessions and many people in that neighborhood were away
on vacation. She exptained that Oxford Street is a smati street and the gas sfation at fhe corner of Oxford and
Grand would be seriously impaired ifi the customers cannot park on the street. The impact on the neighboring
streets has still not been recognized in its immensity in regard to ihe traffic.
�
Zoning File #03-357-370
November 13, 2003, Zoning Committee Minutes
• Page 2
�
�" � ._ . 'z
Dan Dobson, 801 Goodrich Ave., recited Section 61.103 and explained that this proposal is 48 feet and needs
to be set back from alI set back fines which in this case would be the side block on Grand Avenue and Oxford
Avenue 18 feet. He presented the set backs of all four stories of the buiiding and stated that they did not meet
the set back requirements. He also commended the developer for trying to accomplish fhe needs of Grand
Avenue as far as the mixed use but it still doesn't comply with the code. He reiterated that the staff is creating
a dangerous precedent in regards to the wedding cake principal because it is clearly not the law and the entire
building needs to be set back 18 feet or get a variance.
Andrea Hauser, 1055 Lincoln Ave., stated the neighbors strongly oppose this development because of its
height and mass. She also explained that the floor ratio does not meet code. The code allows 82,000 sq. ft.
and the parking was excluded from the project and the sheer mass of the building exceeds any buiiding on
Grand Avenue. She also stated she would be in favor of the development without the fourth floor.
Charles Hardy, 1055 Lincoln Ave., reiterated that if this project went forward the building would obscure his
view from his yard and house windows. He also stated there would be a problem with the traffc going through
the neighborhood and there would be very little green space associated with the building and there should be
a set back.
Bruce Almquist, 1036 Goodrich Ave., addressed the traffic issue in relationship to the traffic study and how it
affected the neighborhood.
Kristen Gay, 1012 Grand Ave., described how the building would have a negative affect on the neighborhood.
Srad MclVaught stated he had no rebuttaf.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Faricy stated it wasn't possibte to do things to pfease all people and the developers came up
with an excellent plan and did a good job in handling the traffic issues, and changed the hours for delivery
trucks and made a driveway for their use.
Commissioner Faricy moved approvai with conditions of the Site Plan Review. Commissioner Morton
seconded the motion.
The motion passed by a vote of 4-0.
Adopted
Drafted by:
Carol Martineau
Recording Secretary
�
Yeas - 4 Nays - 0
Submitted by:
Tom Beach
Zoning Section
Approved by:
Litton Field
Chair
I�
_ : __ �' _
ZONItVG COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
--------------°--------------
------------------------------
1. APPLICANT: Grand Investors 2001 L!C DATE OF HEARING
2. CLASSIFICATIflN: Site Plan Review
FILE # 03-357370
11/13/03
3. LOCATION: 1060 Grand Avenue (between Lexington and Oxford)
4. PLANNING DISTRICT: 16
5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See file
6. PRESENT ZONING: B-2 ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 62.108.c
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: DATE: 11/6/03 BY: Tom Beach
8. DATE RECEIVED: 9/25/03 GEADLINE FOR ACTION: 11/24/Q3
A. PURPOSE: Site plan reviev� for a new mixed-use development.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal calis for:
- A new building with 22,27�t square feet of commercial space on the ground floor and a
total of 29 residentiai units on three floors above. A leve! of underground parking is
proposed in the basement There would aiso be a smali sub-basement for storage.
- The building would be 45 f�=et tal! to the surface of the roof with a parapet that extends
up another 3 feet. The upper floors would be stepped back from the street. The first
floor of the building would be set up to the sidewaik on Grand and on Oxford and would
be set back approximately 50 feet from the alley.
- A totai of 139 off-street parking woufd be provided in a surface parking lot behind the
bu'rlding (32 spaces) and in one level of underground parking (907 spaces).
- There would be a driveway on Oxford and an "In Only" driveway on Grand.
- Room for delivery trucks and trash trucks would be provided behind the building. Most
trucks would be able to enter the site from Grand Avenue and wouid not need to use
the alley for access.
(See attached site plan, elevations and floor plans.)
C. SITE AND EXISTING LAND USE; The site is (ocated on the southwest corner of Grand
and Oxford and covers 38,775 square feet (258'-6" wide x 150' deep).
The exisfing uses are a rea! estate of€ice buildtng with a parking lot and a vacant lot that
was previousiy used as a gas >tation.
D. SURROUNDING LAND USE: Commerciai {zoned B-2) to the north, east and west.
Single-family residentiai (zoner.' RT-1) to the south across the alley.
�
�
�
l�
` E " �' 7 3
' '+f 4
� E. ZONING CODE CITATION: 62,108.c lists findings that must be made to approve the site
plan. (See Section H below.)
H(STORY/DISCUSSION: The applicant submitted two site plans for a smaller
commercial building on the west haif of the property in 2002. The first proposal calied for
two small fast-food restaurant� and was denied by the Pianning Commission. The second
proposal ca)led for a similar but slightly larger commercial bui(dir�g to be used for retail and
was approved by the Planning Commission.
Since then the property to the east has become availabie and the applicant wants to
develop it and the original parcel together.
The applicant submitted a site pian for both lots in May 20, 2003. That plan called for a
one-story commercial building with parking on the roof. The building would have covered
most of the site and had apprt�ximately 36,000 square feet of floor area. The Zoning
Committee recommended approval of the site plan with a condition that size of restaurants
be limifed to 3,000 square fee:. The applicant withdrew the site plan before it was acted on
by the Planning Commission.
The applicant then submitted ;he current site plan on September 25, 2003. The Planning
Commission voted in October to hoid a public hearing on the site plan.
G. DISTRICT COUNCiL RECOMMENDATION: The Summit Hii1 Association (District 16)
recommends that the site plan be approved subject to four conditions:
� - A formal site pian review is filed and the plan complies with all relevant zoning
regulations.
- The developers wi(I come t�ack to District 16 to discuss any significant changes that
result from the site plan re�riew process.
- An appropriate landscapin� plan is submitted and approved.
- There will not be "any high vofume or fast food restaurants {such as Chipotle or
Noodies) that would dramaticaliy increase traffic volume in the area."
(See attached letter.)
H. FINDINGS: Section 62.108.c of the Zoning Code says that in "order to approve the site
plan, the planning commission shall consider and find that the site plan is consistent with"
the findings listed below.
1. The city's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas
of the city.
The Saint Paul Land Use Plan supports mixed-use developments such as this: "In
traditional neighborhoods, `he City wdl support compatible mixed use within single
buildings and in separate tuildings in close proximity. Mixed use reduces
Yransportation time and co<;ts." (2000 Land Use Plan page 27)
The Saint Paul Housing Pian supports "a sufficient density of housing and related uses
to support mass transit." (2006 4lousing Plan page 11)
� The proposed building wili pe consistent with design guidelines in the Comprehensive
Plan: "Designs for new p� in gedestrian-oriented areas should include buildings
out to the sidewalk, parkinr that is not in front of the buiiding and is screened, windows
�
a�- �� � �_
facing the sidewalk and architecture that respects the neighborhood context." (2000 •
Land Jse Plan page 27)
2. Applicable ordinances of trhe City ef Sarnt Paul.
The site plan will provide 139 off-street parking spaces plus a bicycle rack. This is
enough parking to meet the parking requirements of Section 62.103 for 29 condos plu�
a�y ofi the following uses f9r the first floor
- The entire first floor could be used for retail
- The first floor could be used for retail with a 5,000 square foot restaurant (with beer
and wine) or a 3,400 square foot restaurant (with liquor) or a 4,000 square foot fast
food restaurant.
The building will meet the ��eight requirements. Section 61.103 permits buildings to be
up to 30 feet high plus an radditional foot for each foot the building is set back. The
proposed building will be 45 feet tail but the upper floors wili be set back to meet the
height requirement. The building wiil also meet requirements for floor area ratio of 2.0.
The delivery and trash are��s located behind the building in the parking lot will comply
wifh the requirements of Section 61.105. Most trucks wil( be abie to get to the delivery
area from a driveway located on Grand Avenue and leave via Oxford. For larger
trucks, a gate will be provided along the alley so trucks can get to the loading area.
The gate will only be open a limited number of hours a day.
3. Preservation of unigue geologic, geographic or historical/y significant characteristics of �
the city and environmental.y sensitrve areas_
The site plan will preserve and enhance the historic character of Grand Avenue by
locating the building up at the sidewalk and locating the parking behind the buiiding and
underground.
!f any fuel tanks from an old gas station are found buried on the site, they will be
handled according to established city and state regulations.
4. Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for
such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight butfers, preservation of
views, light and air, and those aspects of design which may have substanfial effects on
neighboring land uses.
The site plan is consistent vvith this finding:
- Drainage will be directed at a controlled rate to an existing public storm sewer in the
alley.
- Parking behind the building will be screened along the alley by a fence.
- It will not impact views, ;ight or air. The building will be setback 60 feet from the
alley and the upper floors will be setback from the street and adjacent property.
- Room wiil be provided i� the parking lot behind the building for deliveries and trash
pick-up so that trucks v��auld not block the alley. A gate is proposed to allow trucks
to come in from the ailey if they are foo iarge to use the Grand Avenue driveway. �
Hours when this gate is open should be limited to 8 AM to Noon Monday through
Friday and 8 AM to 10 �M on 5aturday. ,
{ �--
� > -
� '�' �'��a
�. � ,
• The deveiopers have beer. working wifh the Saint Paul Design Center to refine design
of ihe buifding and the fiacade to ensure that it fits into the nelghborhood.
The adjacent building to the west is on the property line next to the Grand Avenue
driveway. Steps need to be taken to protect the comer of the building and keep trucks
from hitting it when they enter the site.
5. The arrangement of buifdings, uses and facilities of the proposed development in order
to assure abutting property and/orits occupants will not be unreasonably affected.
The setback for the buildin� will min[mize its impact on abutting property.
Deliveries and trash pick u� have been designed to minimize the impact on the alley
and nearby properties.
6. Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and location, orientation and
e(evation of structures.
The site plan is consistent with current practices and standards for energy-
conservation.
Locating a mixed use deveiopment on a street with good bus service will encourage
energy conservation by giving residents the option of using the bus instead of driving
their cars.
. 7. Safety and convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian tratfic both wrthin the site and
in relafion fo access streefs, including tratfic circulation features, the locations and
design of entrances and exits and parking areas within the site.
Public Works Traffic Division has reviewed the site plan and conc{uded that the amount
of traffic generated by the proposed development is acceptable and can be handled by
the nearby streets. The current proposal would generate fewer daily trips than the
earlier proposal for a one-story building with parking on the roof under a number of
different development scenarios. (See attached traffic generation tables.)
8. The satisfactory availability and capacity of storm and sanitary sewers, including
solutions to any drainage problems in the area of the development.
The site plan is consis#ent �vith this finding. Storm water from the roof will be directed
at a controlled rate to the e.Kisting public storm sewer in the aliey which has adequate
capacity. (The site currentiy surface drains to the alley and to Grand Avenue.)
Sanitary sewer and water are availabie in Grand Avenue.
9. Sutficient parking, fences, watls and landscaping, necessary to meet the above
objectives.
Parking The development wili provide a totai of 139 off-street parking spaces ( 32
behind the bullding and 107 beneath the building) plus two bicycle racks. This is
� enough parking to meet the code for commercia4 use of the first floor, including a 4,000
square foo! fast food resta�rant and 29 condominium units..
�
i�
t"a : _ ;; `�
� � . a .
Landscaping and fences New shade trees witt be ptanted in the sidewalk on �
Grand and Oxford. The plan also cails fior using decorative pavers as accents in the
public sidewalk along Grand and Oxford. A 4' wide landscaped sfrip and screening
fence is planned atong the alley
10. Site accessibility in accordance with fhe provisions of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA), including park�ng spaces, passengerloadr�g zones and accessible routes.
Site accessibility, including provision of accessible parking spaces, will be provided as
required by the ADA.
11. Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey Erosion
Sediment and Control Ha,�dbook. "
Standard construction practices wili be required to keep sediment from being tracked
off site or being carried infio fhe storm sewer during construction.
STAFF RECOMMENDATtON: Based on findings 1 through 11 staff recommends
approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions
1. The gate in the fence along the alley for truck deliveries be open only from the hours
of 8 AM to Noon Monday :hrough Friday and 8 AM to 10 AM on Saturday.
2. Final plans must be subm tted showing measures to be taken to protect the corner of
the buiiding to the west ar d keep trucks from hitting it when they enter the site. �
3. lf any fuel tanks are founa buried on the site, they must be handled according to
estabiished city and state regulations.
4. Final plans with additional detail for storm water drainage, utilities, sidewaik paving, '
landscaping and erosion/sediment control must be submitted and approved by City
staff.
Attachments
Letter from District 16
7raffic generation numbers
Site plan
Building facade, floor plans, elevations, sections
Location maps
I, W mantlaMerg�omnglSave�29673713041. W PD
�
1�'
�
�
�
Q
�L
c�
�
�
V
�
C
d
�
Q.
O
N
d
�
a
�
6
�
O
�
O
P
��
� 'a �
_ �
Q. 9 �
�
_ � @
O � L Y
y N (6
�j � � Q
Q � � � L �
��c
Y
d o �
a F n ,�
� 'k �
aw
s
m � o
a d ��
G C
aw
Y
� o
a � o N
0
� .X c»
aw
Y
� C a
a�y ��
r 2 C
aw
T
� o O
Y C O rn
N y � �
3w
R
a c a o
rn
v `m � �
�
S W
Y �
L y �
aa
x a
� d �
¢a
Q � O
- .c .a��-
�' N
� d N
a a N
Y
Q � (O
a
� �
L
N �d
�k M
�
C
� M
� � LL
� O
a ,aoQ
•- v�
�
�
_ �
� �
�X
� �
d � �T
L O �
L �
� � _
U�s
s
R
� w e n a o
� "x �i" ° o M o'
aW
s
d L
a � � �
y � ry � p � N
�L C
aw
s
a "` a 0 00
�'R � v m�
Q w
Y
U C
a o 0 0 0
m � N � O � N
2� C
a w
T
y r o� o o�
N � � Q � � N
y X N � � N
3 �
m
� C o a o 0
y m o 0 0 0 o m
y � � `� �n u�
3 W
Y d
�L N � � N
aa
s a o �
aa"
N � �
n a ° ° �
� N
� R � � W
a a (V � o
� � �p f� V
Q r � �
p, m o
� v?
t � o m
N 1 � 'n
� A �
G y � N
�
t !�
� O O
� a °,� ° y a
0
4
C
O m y O
y � U m
U L'' � e � n �
i �
1_ 'u F ' O $ b C
a �= m N �
(n SNK 2'�
f ��+
.�
�M
L
�
�
�
0
�
�
�
`F-
W
L..
��
n � y
W
�
�
�
�
W
�
�
�
L
�
r.o
°�
�
�
V
�
� {f 4
� ... 4,� ,1. � ri_
i
_ __
� � w.,
_�
�. � o
�
� i .� C
Q O i Y
N
�� � � Q
Y G � Y O
a 0 � 3 O
� m � _
� a � � p m
o � o o M
V � � O f�p T
a � o 0
� �� y�
_ � o
ON �O� N �
H � N
o m o o h
N � N � � �
o � o o �
p N Q O p�
h� � �`_
� � N
� O N
Q
n
N O n
� N
� c v
�i r r
� �
� m
`_ e- O
<O O rn
0 oi
v .- m
m
� a c�
u. ou Q�i
y � � o m
C
V �
O d
� �
d
C N
� Q
�
�
_�
��
� X
� �
� i �
d �
i N 'a
�
U`rn
o ry o 0
� �
� M � M
C � (�O M t �
o ° ro �- c
�n ° a m '�
o � o 0
O o- N `- �O N
N tn
o M a � o �
O � O M
L� � � µ�j �
o m a � o �
M
� � ^ � �
+� N h
� N M
m
m r �
N N
� v m
N h O
� aJ V
� O O
c m �
a ai °j
v m �
m
M �
N �
° o�- ° o� a
o v o a p
�y �y
O
C 9
C
'm � O
v � V d
� m m 7
m a a c
m R N O
n U�' a' ~
If
;�
� r �
vT 5 �: �, � $
„I°�
�.
�
L
�
�
.t
VJ
�
�
��
�
�
�
�
-1--+
0
O
�'{.�•
�
�
�
/'��'�''�
V
O
O
O
<�J
� ^'
W
��¢�
\U
L
� �
� O
� ,
� �
� v
L �f�
� V�
�
�
�
�
� '
t .
`� {.
� i1
i
1:� � ..
� 1 � �
;�
i ,:
;';
�
,,
f
i
i
i .
c:
r
i
a
�:
� i.
i.
� ,.
,
, ; i i ;
i
�;
'
�
� ,:
i .
.;.
� �.
i �'
;�
� ;`
,�
�-�
�'
��
' �
� I P
Summi�_ Hill
Fssociation
'
September 25, 20p3
! Saint Paul Planning Commissio�
f C/p Tom 8each
' LACense Inspection at�d �nvironsnentaf Protection.
'. Room 300 k.owry Professional Building
350 St: Peier Stfeet . �
: SairFt Paul, Minn�3ota 55102 �
6122221558 ^ i.
u+a
,� _ ... �a. �
• . V Y •
11 Associa
Dlstriot 1 B Pians
Sso $aint C
Salnt Paul, Minne
TelBpho�s 65
Fax 65
e-mail surnmit.hill�Cl.si
i R�: SPR #Q3-302277 -
�
�
� Dear Me[Ttbers of tha Plann'sng f;omrTiission:
� Th� Zoning and Land Use Commitfes of the Sum�nit Hil1 Association/Distric{ 16 F'ianning
; Counci! ("SHA°}, together with in#erested neighbors, has met severat times with 8rad .
- McNaught, Ned R�kavina, and Mark Vanqelli o# Grand Inv,estors.2009, LLC ("Grand
invesfors") to discuss their pians to deveiop a building at 1050-1060 Grand qvenue. Dur
� `our last` meeting on September �3, 20p3, the comxnit�ee reviewed a new ptan for the pro�
b�ailcling that ir�ciudes retaii sgaee on the first �loor three sfories of condominium units, ar
� undsrgt'ound parking. At,the meeting, Grand lnve,stors presented the new plan and neigf
,warE: giysn an opportuni#y fo commertf on it.
While a numbee af neighbo�s expressed concerns� about fhe heighf and mass of the newl
:proposed projec}, mosf considered the new plan � signi�cant imProvement from previous
pkans for the site, In partieufar, r€eighbors feef that the mixed-use buifding with undergrou
tparkfng: ;
i, •: Addres�es concerns about traffic flow oi� the site and in the aliey;
� ! Provides fewer squar� feef for retail, therefore diminishing fhe impact ot trafific
entering and exiting the site; `
•' Provides adequate, off-ailey spac� for Yhe loading and unloading of 2rucks;
+ Provides a more signiF�cant buffer betv✓een the buifding and neigh6ors to the Sc
As a result of the discussion, the Zoning and Lanc� Use Commit#ee agreed to recomtnend
'approvat of a site plan as presenfed for the rriixed'use refaii/residentiai project with the
:fofilo�nring conditions; i
f ' a
1) A fotmal site pian for th� project is filed, v�rith the city and recei�es appropciate re�
for eompiiance with all city zoning regulatior�s;
2) Grand lnvestors wilt refvirn to the Zoning:and Lattd iJse Commi#tee #o djscuss ar
significant ohanges to the presented plan n�cessitated hy the city's site pian reviev�
process; � �
' 3) An appropriate landsca$aing pfan is presertted #o the cify and approved by the cit�
; forestei "
! 4) The retail area of the building wi11 nof contain any high volame os fast foad
' resTaurants (SUCh as Chipotls or Noodfes &(Co.) that vroufd drarpa#ically increase t �
vofume to the area,
; ��
i '
�.
i�
�.'
, .
I _
1�
!
;:
a.
i,'
„
�:
,�
1:' .
>�
I ; i�
!'; ' �fi
:�
�'
;w
; �
� ��
� ' �2
,.;.�
� ;�
� i i�
i
�' {
i '. o
�
a _ '�
? � i�
;
: +
; ' !@
, ' i�
' � t;
�
;. i
�.
,I
i
i �
; ,
:,;
i;
i
i
. !:
i,
i'`
I�
i
:.�
�,
i
i,
;'�
„'
�,
i
i:
' � .
3 '
'.
i'
� , �
; _._.,
Summi2- Hill
Saint {?aul Planning Commissicn
; Sepfember 26, 2003 '
i Pa�ie 2 ,
�
�
A55ociuLion
3
f
6122221558
L � �
° �i � " �
i`
� 9f Grartd Investors meets these �onditions, they c�n be assuced of the Summit Hill
'� ; Associ�tion's support for the frn�l project as pres�nfed.
!' If you have any questions about the discussion or recommendation, you may contact
!; : Eltert 8'tate's, SHA ExecativQ Director, af 222-.'f 222.
', /� �irr }erefy, ;
C r j � t
�
�im F! i on ���
;: ; Zoning and Land Use Cor3�mitte�s Chair :
;,.
!,
� -
j C(::
i .
�
;
,
�
�rad McNaught, Ned Rukavina, & Mark V�hnelli, Grand Envestors 2001, LLC
�ouncilmember Chris C9leman �
;
�
, 3
i
� ,
i
I
�� . .
i �
�
,)
1 '
1'
� '
f
�
L
�
�
i
i
�
L"_"-..—
0
n
1
�
i
�
�
i
1,
(
i '
3
�
; � �
P
Page 1 of 1
�
Tom Beach - Grand A��efOxford development
��� --�— � � -
From: <Smithbranca@cs.com>
To: <Tom.Beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/13/2003 9:07 PM
Subject: Grand Ave/Oxford development
� `� �a k
" `-` � _
�
�
Mr. Beach,
1 would like to give you the opinion of myself and my neighbors on Goodrich Ave; the
proposed development is way too large and unseemly. Also, there is a fear that more and
more chain and national retail sfores wili take over Grand ave turning it into yet one more strip
mall in anywhere usa. A big �o vote from us and feYs go back to the drawing board. Juliet
Branca
� �.
t'
file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\beachtom\Locai%20Settings\Temp\GW } 00010.... I 1/ 13/2003
Adding different activities and increasing congestion on GRAIVD ave
Page 1 af 1
Tom Beach - GRAND ave. Edina Realty/ Clark Station Lots
_ _ �
From: °Charies McManus" <chazles.mcmanus@comcast.nev
To: <tom.beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: i l/13/2003 11:35 AM
Subject: GRAND aee. Edina Realty/ Clark 9tatton Lots
CC: <ward2@ci.sYpaul.mn.us>
Comments on EDINA REALTY and Clark STATION lot Proposed development:
11/I3/2003
� �
� �� _ !s ,.� � �
Adding MORE RETAIL and ADDING 1/2 BLOCK OF DENSE RESIDENTIAL HflUSING and
increasing congestion on GRAND avenue. is NOT appropriate on the busiest block on GRAND avenue,
TAIS block gets completely blocked by traffic every single day!!!
GRAND avenue succeeds as a livable mix use street. NOT because we have severat mini ma11s on
EACH and EVERY BLOCK. It succeeds because RETAIL and OFFICE blocks are SEPARATED by
RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS
We already have a M1NI MALL at this BLOCK...THE OXFORD 1VfAl,L!!!
SOLUTION: for GRAND at OXFORD:
1. REPLACE THE EDINA OFFICE SPACE BUILDING WITH AN EQUIVALENT SIZED
OFFICE BLDG. (WE DON"T NEED ANOTHER MINI MALL in addition to the OXFORD
Mini Mall, on the same intersection!!t)
Why: CHANGING alI avaiIable lots on Grand avenue to Mini malIs is not what we
WANT( ! f i
2. Allow Developers to add 2000-3000 sq. ft. of RETAIL SPACE to replace "gas station sized"
retail space long empty
Why: SMALL BUSINESS RETATL and OFFICE is what GRAND Avenue is about!!!
3. ELIMINAT'E 51,000 sq. ft. of RESIDENTIAL
Why: COMMERCIAL block only?
HEX ZONNING COMMITTEE/CITY PLANNERS/city council members:
DO your job! i!! .
COME UP with a block-by-block occupancy restriction law or ordinance or zoning guidelines. STOP
THE "MALLIZATION" OF Grand avenue. STOP letting outside developers iell us what we need
should chanae GRAND avenue into.
Regards,
Charlie McManus, a 20 year resident, 1081 Goodrich Ave.
Ph:651-224-9384
�
�
�
file:/IC:�Documents }00008.... 11llii2003
Page 1 of 1
�
�_ _ �. �� w
Tom �ea�h -���;r-dtory development on Grand Avenue �
� ���a- - - — —
From: "Greg Wilmes" �wilmes@lawx.com>
To: <tom.beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Daie: 11J13l2003 11:39 AM
Subject: Four-story development on C,rand Avenue
CC: <moreilly@mm.com>
Gentlemen:
The purpose of this e-mail is to voice our OPPOSITION to the proposal to
buiid 29 condos and 22,000 ft.retail space on Grand Avenue. While we are
generally not opposed to consirucfing more living and retail space on Grand,
we are gravely concerned with what is currently being proposed. We live on
the corner of Chatsworth and Lincoln Avenue (one block away trom the
proposed site) and are extremely concerned about the increased tra�c,
violence and aesthetic disaster that will come to our neighborhood if this
proposition goes through. We respectFully request that you take a few
minutes to walk up and down Lincoln Avenue from Lexington to Miiton and take
note of the MANY smail children that are now in our neighborhood. Please
even knock on a few doors and talk to us. We've had an explosion of babies
being born and new neighbors with small chiidren. We alone have two small
children (ages 3 1/2 and 19 mo�ths). How is ail this increased traffic a
good thing for our children? Regarding the size of this project, we feel
iYs grossly disproportionate to what already exits on Grand - why construct
• such a mammoth building? It will look out of piace, towering above ali
oYher buildings on Grand. Please, IeYs put things into perspective and be
tastefui about it. Finally, we are gravely concerned about the increase in
violence that will surely come with the additionaf retaii shops. While
we're not opposed to more retail, we just are worried that SO MUCH of
everything wiil lead to more trouble in our neighborhood. How can this be
avoided?
We thank you for considering the foregoing points and pray that the right
decision is made regarding our beautiful, historic neighborhoodi
Sincerely,
Maggie O'Reilly, Greg Wilmes (and our children Ethan - 3 112 and Josephine -
19 months)
�
�t
file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settingslbeachtom\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00008.... i1i13/2003
Page 1 of 1
Tom Beach - Public Hearing on Fo�ar-�a�r,� l����!a�ment of Ciark Station and Edina �
Rea(ty Lot
From: <DDicksonS@aoi.com? '1 � � � � � �
To: <Tom.Beach@cistpaui.mn.us>, <ward2@ci.stpaui.mn.us> 1 _ °
Date: 11/13/2003 12:47 PM
Subject: Public Hearing on Four-Story Development of Clark Station and Edina Reaity Lot
Dear Councilman Coleman and Mr. Beach:
My wife and I live at 1073 Goodrich Avenue, two blocks from the site of the
proposed development on Grand Avenue {the Clark Station and Edina Realty Lots).
We are not able to attend the public hearing on 11-13-03, but do have some
concerns we would like considered. We are glad to see something being
developed for that site, since the Clark Station lot has been empty now for some time.
However, the proposed combination condominium/retail comptex is too large
for our neighborhood. We believe it would make the aiready difficult traffic
situation worse. We already have difficulty turning into our alleyway off
Lexington, and generally approach it from Oxford Street. If all the parking from
the new complex is to be accessed from O�ord Street, it will make it even more
difficult for us to get to our garage. Saturdays will be particularly
difficult; we believe the City wi11 need another 1ra�c lighf aY Oxford and Grand
to control the traffic flow.
We also believe that the proposed height of the building is too high,
particularly with no setback. it will tower over the other buildings in our area,
taking away from the street atmosphere that makes Grand Avenue aftractive. We
think that a three story building with a setback would be much more acceptable,
along the lines of the Historic Grand Avenue Apartmenfs on #he norfhwest
corner of Grand and Lexington.
We have now lived in our house for 20 years, and have really enjoyed the
amenities and atmosphere provided by St. Paul and the Grand Avenue area. We
believe that the proposed development wou)d cause significant problems which will
make the Avenue less attractive and hospitable to residents and customers
alike. Thank you for considering our opinions. David D. Stewart, Ph.D., and
Jodi A. Martin, Ph.D.
L�
•
�
file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\beachtom\Local%20Settings\Temp1GW } 00008.... 1 ? /13/2003
Page 1 of 1
�
Tam �ea�t? - C��*k Station and Edina Realty Lot
From: "Parthy McGandless" <pmcc@scc.net> � �. �„ = . � . �
_ � �.
To: <Tom.Beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>,.<ward2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/13/2003 9:11 AM
Subject: Clark Station and Edina Realty Lot
Dear Mr. 8each, Mr. Co�eman, and Zoning Committee members,
1 had very much hoped to attend the Zoning Committee meeting at 330 today but, as of last night, I have been
called in to work this afternoon.
I have strong concerns about the height of this proposed building. As currently designed, it will be the tailest,
most commanding structure in an historic area. I have heard many comments from peopte visiting from the
surrounding metro area and from closer neighbors that the Victoria Crossing building is too fmposing and
alienating (the combination of the height and no set-back). This proposed building is a much larger scale.
We have aff heard the repeated opinion that the draw of Grand Avenue is it's "European" charm and pedestrian-
friendly scale. This proposed design seems to ignore these marketing facts. No one likes to walk in the shadow
of a giant, overwhelming structure. Hence the reason for utilizing set-backs (as in the taller apartments at Grand
and Lexington) or limiting height (the Muska Lighting building).
I also have concerns about whether the sewage system and other public utilities can support a structure in this
immediate neighborhood that houses 29 condominiums in a stretch of 243 feet. How many toilets,
� showers, sinks, and laundry facil�ties will this include? There is already an occasional odor probiem at the sewer
at Lexington and Lincoln and power outages on Grand and Lincoln during the summer.
The developers have maintained that the only way they can make this project financially viable is to build so high
and so tight into every square foot. 1 find this argument troubling and more an indication of financial
mismanagemeni or overextended profit goais than an economical fact. The Muska building, so recently designed
and built, is proof that a compromise and rational structure is feasible.
Perhaps not any and every developer has the negotiating skilis and financial savvy to build on Grand Avenue.
Every development permanently alters the face of the neighborhood and sets a precedent for all future projects. I
believe developing on Grand Avenue is a privilege that must be earned by demonstrating an understanding of the
issues and an ability to creatively deal with the challenges presented.
I understand a compromise is necessary here. I do not see this buiiding as a respectful, wise, forward-thinking
compromise. Take the top floor off, and then I see a compromise. The building wouid stiil be too large for my
taste, but 1 understand that the needs of no one set of people can be the presiding factor here.
�
I ask that you utilize your skills and your power as an outside decision-making body to guide this project to a
rational conclusion in which the loss is distributed over al( parties, not just to the neighborhood and to intact
businesses such as All Ame; ican Auto Body. i do not think an entire neighborhood should have to suffer for the
financial overe�ension of a specific developer.
Thank you for your aitention,
Parthy McCandless
1076 Lincoln Avenue
�. �
file:/JC:�DocumenYs%20and%20Settings\beachtom�LoeaI%20Settings\Temp\GW}00008.... il/13/2003
Page 1 of 2
Tom Beach - Grand Aue. �����s�'
From: <awm@att.net>
To: <ward2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 1'l113l2003 7:95 AM
Subject: Grand Ave_ Proposal
CC: <Tom.beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Chris,
I am a residen# of your area. 1 live with my husband and children at 1009
Lincoin. I work evenings as a Police Officer and will not be able #o attend
fhe Zoning Committee meeting tonight. I wanted to express my opinion because
I grew up in this neighborhood and have lived here for 40 years.
My first concern is for the children living in this neighborhood. Your
proposal to have a parking facility that empties on to Lincoln is dangerous.
Currently we have a large amount of traffic that whips down Lincoln
everyday. If you watch, it is not people living in the neighborhood. It is
people traveling Lincoln to avoid Grand Ave. Traffic. 1 can stand and see
them coming from Victoria all the way down to Lexington or vice �ersa. You
are concern fhat emptying a parking ramp onto Grand would be dangerous, how
about the rest of us who see the large volumes of pedestrians, especially
children who travel on O�ord. There are 2 large elementary schools residing
on O�ord thus creating large groups of children on Oxford.
Everyone who lives & works in this area knows that you can not get
ontolacross Grand Ave. fram Oxford because ther is no traffic signal.
Therefore your tra�c coming out of the parking ramp is going to turn right
and empty on to Lincoln Avenue. Jsut an FYI from 1027 Lincoln to 970 Lincoln
(1 1/2 blocks) there are close to 40 children (mainly under the age of 10).
The tra�c that races down Lincoln and the increased tra�c that wiN be
caused by the parking ramp are a definite danger to these children.
I am also concern with the increased ln business traffic. While walking my
kids to school yesterday morning (within 30 minufes) there were 7 frucks (big
trucks) driving down lincoin, again headed up towards Victoria; 3 beer
trucks, a coca cola truck and a Sysco truck.. Uniess one of my neighbors is
having a heck of a party these trucks were using Lincoln as an alternative to
Grand Ave. We had to move our basketball net from the back of the garage to
the back of the house because of the amount of Trucks racing down the alley.
We were afraid one of the kids would get hit.
Finally i disapprove of the size of the proposed structure. When we moved in
here we had no intention of living next to a 48 foot structure. We assumed
that the Summit Hill Assoc. and the City Councii and the Zoning Board wouid
prooect the integrity of this community and not ai(ow for tfiis monsfocify in
our neighborhood.
I have no problem with building up this section of Grand Ave. but to propose
this overwhelming building structure and dump its traffic into our
neighborhood is obscene. (Trust me I know about traffic and its enforcement
and the increasing trafftc whipping down Lincoin is dangerous!!)
Please downsize the heighi of this structure and dump the business traffic
onto Grand Avenue.
_ � �
�� _ �''° � �
�
�
��
file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\beachtovn\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW } 00010.... 11/13/200�
Page 3 of 2
�
�'asia Wescott Metry
�eLzt L;ncoln Ave.
° 1 s; .�__:. '
V in � <J
�
��
P.S. A Corona Beer truck just went past the house down Lincoin P.ve... one
of my neighbors must be a real party animal.
:�
file://C.'�Documents%20and%20Settings\beachtom\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW } 00010.... 11/13/2003
, � ,� Page 1 of 2
� � °� ,�, ,�, � a.
_ -, �
Tom Be�c�? a F�6a--��=-: �: ''-�ra�+ Ayenue Development ,_. .
�
�rom: "Mary P. Diaz" <mdiaz@gw.hamline.edu>
Ta: <Tom.Beach@ci.stpaut.mn.us>
Date: 11/12/2Q03 1129 PM
SubjecY: Four-Story Grand Avenue Development
Dear Mr. Beach:
As a resident of Grand and Lincoln Avenues since 9 979, nsar the
proposed development on Grand to the comer of Oxfiord, I would like to
express my vehement opposition to such a project. Grand Avenue is
currently commerciaily "overpopuiated" to the exient that both parking,
drivi�g and walking in the area are often severely hindered.
While I do not know the specific circumstances regarding the accident
at the corner of Grand and Avon recently, I know that in my mind I have
felt that due to too much traffic, too many signs, too many
distractions, much unpredictable foot traffic, poorly painted
crosswalks, poor visibility both at night and during the day, that, even
though I drive very carefully on Grand, I could have had the same thing
happen to me. There is simply already too much of everything on Grand
Avenue right now between LexingTon and Dale.
Too add the enormous proposed building in the proposed location
demonsfrates a total disregard for the residents of the area, and, I
suspect, in the long r�n, for many of the small businesses. Those who
propose and ailow this are about to kiii the goose that laid the goiden
egg with such development. It appears that planners are also missing
the point that the commercial attraction to C�rand Avenue has been smali,
individual stores. The addition of the structure at the SW corner of
Grand and Victoria seems to suggest that there is a pian to make Grand
Ave. a big chain-store mall, something that people can find in many
parts of the metro area wifh Iots of parking. The enormity of the
proposed structure itself will certainly not fit the tone and ambience
of the avenue and the neighborhood, no matter how architects iry to
disguise it.
Exiting the cars from the development to Oxford:
a) will not keep them off of Grand, and wiil most certainly turn that
intersection , as weli as the ones af Lexingfon and Vctoria, into a
nightmare;
b) will run many cars right into the neighborhood, especially Lincoln
Ave., where drivers will go in an attempt to avoid the fiasco o� Grand
Ave (Right now a 1eR-hand tum from soufh ot Grand onto Grand is oRen
dangerous and nearly impossible);
c) will make a neighborhood populated with many young children much
more dangerous with respect to tra�c;
d) will increase the danger to both pedestrians and cars on Grand.
Even if all of the 140 proposed parking spaces were free parking (which
certai�Iy hasn'# been the case at the comer of Grand and Victoria,
causing people to seek sfreet parking in the neighborhood), the tra�c
com'rng and go'rng is going to cause probiems for all. The number of 140
parking spaces is no doubt a bit misleading, since there will be a good
number of spaces allotted to the owners of the condominiums.
While I understand ihat developing the space thaf is avaifable on that
��
�
i
file:!/C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\beachtom\I,ocal%20Settings\Temp\GW } 00010.... 11/13/200�
Page 2 of 2
biock is something thai can and should happen, i hopP tFa- the r;t ^�
� St. PaW will consider a pian inat wouio be ooTn rrier�aiy to .� a �� .;; � ir �
- .« � .a..
neighborhood and avenue, as well as enhance the pooular and pleasant "
"shop" atmosphere that has made Grand Avenue popular in the first place.
Just because a developer who wishes to walk away with large profits
presents a plan, doesn't mean that the community must mindlessly
follow.
Thank you for your attention. I hope that my opinion wiil be
considered at the public hearing tomorrow, November 13.
Sincerely,
Mary P. Diaz
937 Lincoln Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55105
�
•
�e» f
file:�/C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\beachtom\Local%20Settings\TEmp\GW}00010..., ii/;3/2003
Page 1 of 1
Tom Beas� a!'��_��:; .�.<^��r,� Development proposed �y Grand Investc�r� -.. r.-� -..�
From; Eric Hedberg <erich222@earthlink.net>
To: <TOM.BEACH@ci.sfpaul.mn.us>, <CHRIS.COLEMAN@ci_stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/12/2003 7:10 PM
Subject: Oxford at Grand Devefopment proposed by Grand Investors
Genttemen,
I am sure you, as I, am weary of vis�ting fhe issues of the project
proposed at Oxford and Grand. Unfortunately, unlike lane striping or
decorative items, buildings are not easily removed or changed. Please
take note of the presentations of the residents near the development
lhis Thursday. At 48 feef, this building wii! tower 8 feet above Yhe
alfey power poles and 18 feet above the Lexington Restaurant. Its
footprint puts it o� a scale with housing developments like those on
University at Fairview and in Bloomington at Lyndale and 494. This is
not a wise choice for this neighborhood.
Many of us support and encourage the development of the space and the
adding of mixed use buildings like Muska's to the neighborhood. This
plan, fhough, wii� exacerbate the traffic problems in this area,
negatively affect sma�l businesses near it and has a floor plan designed
for national chain businesses with no long term interests in St. Paul or
its neighborhoods.
This project should not continue by virtue of its wearing out #he
residents or the St. Paul staff and oificials who must approve its
development. 1 encourage you to remember thaY it has been fhe
stewardship of many like you that has built this neighborhood and city.
Stop this proposed project now so that a better plan can be developed.
Thank you
Eric Hedberg
1021 Lincoln Ave.
��
� �
� �� � �r �- �_
� _ �,
L�
�
file:;1C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\beachtom\Local%20SettirgslTemp\GW } OQO 10.... l 1/13l20Q3
L �
�
Zoning Committee
St. Paul Planning Commission
St. Paul, Minnesota 55102
Re: Proposed Mixed Use Site Plan for 1050 and 1060 Grand Avenue
Dear Committee Members:
The most recent Site Plan for 1050 and 1060 Grand Avenue features improvements over
the last proposal including no ailey access and a 55 ft. alley setback with some
landscaping. However, the buiiding's huge mass and unprecedented height
overwhelmingiy offset these improvements. The building should have only one or two
levels of condominiums with the requisite setbacks from Grand Avenue and Oxford
Street.
Andrea Hauser
L. Charles Hardy
1055 Lincoln Ave.
St. Paul, MN 5�20�
November i l, 2003
. THE 48 FOOT BITILDING LACKS THE REQUISITE 18 FOOT SETBACI�S �N
GRAND AVE. AND OXFORD S'T.
Community Business B-2 zoning allows a maYimum height of 30 feet. Section 61.103.
Buildings exceeding 30 feet in height must have a one foot setback from all property lines
for every foot over 30 feet.
(D)The height of the structure may exceed [30 feet],
provided the structure is set back from all setback lines a
distance equal to the height which said structure exceeds
the maximum building height allowed in the district.
Section 61.103(d).
Setback: The distance required to obtain front, side or
rear yard open space provisions of this code, measured from
the lot line to the above-grade faces of the building.
Section 60.219 S.
THE 4-STt3RY BUILDING WITH UNDERGR�UND PARKING EXCE�DS 7`HE
CODE'S LIMIT flN DENSITY AND BULK.
. Zone B-2 allows a ma�mum Floor Area Rrztio (F.A.R.) of 2.0. Section 61.103. The
development can have no more than 83,200 sq. ft. fQr all buildings and structures as the
��
� �
r �, °P r. .
\� . ` nM
... -� . �.. - - ' _ • _ . •'L,.�-.�.Y1q� .�a.._
lot's total area is 4?,600 sq. ft. (depth of 160 ft. by street frontage of260 ft.). �
F'Zoor area ratio (F.A.R.): The total _floor area of all
buildings or structures on a zoning lot divided by �he area
of said lot. Section 60.2Q6 F
Structure: Anything constructed or erected, the us? of which
requires location on the ground or attachment to something
having location on �ne ground. Section 60.219 S
Based on definitions of Floor Area Ratio and Structure, the Floor Area Ratio calculation
includes the garage, retail, and residential levels of the building.
Parking level 39,000 sq. ft.
Retait 22,363
2nd floor 18,000 (est. from scale drawing}
3rd floor 13,000 (est. from scale drawing)
4th floor 15.000 (est. from scale drawin�
Total 112,3b3 sq. $
Total developed square footage of ll2,000 greatly exceeds the allowable Floor Area .
Ratio of 2.0 or 83,200 sq. ft.
In error, the City has used the Code's defmition for "F1oor Area"to calculate F.A. R.
"FZoor Area" excludes basements, attached garages, unenclosed porches, elevator and
stair bulkheads, and accessory structures, among other areas . Section 61.206 F. In
cOntrast, "Floor Area Ratio" includes without limitation, "floor area of all
buildinas or structures". `�structure" is broadly defined to include
unenclosed porches, garages, and accessory uses.
Please do not approve this oversized development. Its height and mass exceed all other
buildings in the vicinity. It shonld have a maYimum of three floors with the requisite
setbacks where the height exceeds 30 feet. The City Code must be enforced so that
development on Grand Avenue has an appropriate density.
Sincerely,
Charlie Hardy & Andrea Hauser
cc: Tom Beach
Councilmember Chris Coleman
�
�
�' � ^ . � O
a ; ` �° s �_ Page 1 of 1
Tom Beach - Fca��!�.��=�.?= ^-�-�.�Bopment Proposat at 1050-1060
. Grand Ave.
From: "Dave Gorg" <Dave@mtzcorp.com>
To: <Tom.Beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward2@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: Ii/11J2Q03 8:57 PM
Subject: Four Story Deveiopment Proposa! at 1050-1060 Grand Ave.
Tom Beach/Chris Coteman:
I am planning on attending the Pub(ic Hearing of the Zoning Committee, scheduled for
this Thursday at 3:30PM. I was at the Summit Hili Association Meeting Iast month to
review the proposed development plan with the developers and the committee. At that
meeting I stated that I was in favor of the proposai for combining residential and retail in
a new building at the site; however, I object to the height being 48 feet. Since that
meeting, I have looked closely at the existing buildings along Grand Ave. between
Hamline and Victoria, a distance of 8 city blocks, and feel strongly that this building is
out of scale (in height) for this neighborhood. I also measured the height of the highest
buildings in that area, and found that this proposal is 10 feet higher than the highest
existing building, The Lexington at Grand and Lexington is 30 feet in height. The historic
Grand Ave Apartments at the NW quadrant of that intersection, the highest building in
the 8 block span, is 38.6 feet, As an object for reference, I measured the height of the
large power pole in the alley that is near the southeast corner of the site. It is 40 feet in
height. I feel that 48 �eet is one story too high and that the building shoulc� not be higher
• than three stories, or 36 feet. Please feel free to contact me with any comments or
questions that you may have.
Dave Gorg, PE
Martinez Corporation
1061 Lincoln Ave.
651-224-6381
651-253-8872 cell phone
�
�
fiie://C:1Documents%20and%205ettings\beachtom\Local%20Settings\Temp\Ca'vYI}00003.... il/L/2fl03
Page i of 1
� ,_�. ,�f � � µ
,_._ _ �s� 4�ach - No 4 story building at 10�0 & 1060 Gra�?�?e._ _._.; �,;��,��,_ _ �
s
From: "Heather Fredrickson" �hfredric@umn.edu>
To: <tom.beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 94f1012003 40:Q9 PM
Subject: No 4 story buiiding at 1050 & 1060 Grand!
Nightmare! A 48 foo# tall buiiding in a historic, residential
neighborhood that boasts CHARMI As a resident of Lincoln Avenue— I
would iike to be able to see the sun after a commercial building is
constructed. You don't even see something this big ia the suburbs!
There have to be zoning rules that prohibit such monstrosities! I have
2 small children that walk to schooi and will be threatened by the huge
increase in traffic on Grand and Oxford.
PLEASE stop this developer or hetp them put a pian forward fhat Grand
Avenue and it's neighbors can live with!
Sincerely,
Heather Fredrickson
.
�
��
file:/!C:\Documants%20and%20SettingslbeacntomlLocal%2QSettingslTemp\G�,V} 00008.... 11 /11/2003
Page I of 1
^ ' `�
���-�.
Tom Beach -_NO ��a�a��rm��� 1050 &1060 Grand
_ _ ,_ _
i � _�_ .
�. �:..:�=--
From: "Srent �redrickson" <fred@mninter.net>
To: <tom.beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/10/2003 10:30 PM
Subject: NO Development 1650 &1060 Grand
Ridiculous! A 48 foot tali building in a historic, residential neighborhood that boasts CHARM! As a resident of
Lincoin Avenue— I would like to be able to see the sun after a commercial building is constructed. You don't even
see something this big in the suburbs! There have to be zoning rules ihat prohibit such monstrosities! I have 2
small children that walk to school and will be threatened by the huge increase in traffc on Grand and Oafiord.
PLEASE stop this developer or help them put a plan forward that Grand Avenue and iYs neighbors can live with!
•
�J
'��,>
File:/{C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\beachtom\Local%20Settings\Temp1G;,�} 00010.... 11/11/2003
Page 1 of 1
Tom Beach - Pubiic H�aring re. Zoning of P�;�q��r��.,��'��nd/Oxford in St. Paul
- �
From: "Joy O'Toole" <jay.atoole@usgo.net>
To: <Tom.Beach@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/11/20Q3 7:58 AM
Subject: Public Hearing re. Zoning of Property at Grand/Oxford in St. Paul
I am unable to attend the hearing Thursday 11/13. However, for whatever
it's worth, I want it known that many of us who live in the area which would
be most affected by the proposed pian are against if.
- The proposed building(s) will reach a height of 48 feet and will tower
over other buildings in the area as we(I as the homes on the north side of
Lincoin from Lexington to Oxford. The height and mass of this proposed
devefopment is unprecedented in this neighborhood. IPs at least 16 feet
too tall. This is not an acceptable solution.
- This overly large, high structure would house 140 cars which would exit
onto Oafiord. This means Lincoin Avenue and fhe altey befween Grand and
Lincoln would bear the brunt of the overflow traffic (cars and delivery
trucks). We on Lincoln now have Yo put up with Grand overflow of delivery
trucks including semis; we don't need to encourage more of this.
- Passenger cars now speed up and down Li�coln resulting in danger to the
many children living and playing on Lincoln. Why would we encourage a worse
situation?
- Word is that parking would be prohibited on O�ord between Grand and
Lincoln. At least one small, well-established business, Ali American Auto
Service, would suffer a loss of business. Further, since they are not open
weekends, if would cost them a significant amount to install chains and/or
hire guards to prevent shoppers from parking in the All American lot, which
they woufd do if given the chance in order to avoid paying for parking.
Once again, 1 recommend a 20 MPH speed limit on Lincoln between Dale and
Lexington and that frequent 10 MPH signs be erected in the alleys between
Grand and Lincoln from Lexington to Dale. Of course, we will expect the
City in iis infinite wisdom to see that those posted speed limifs are
obeyed.
http://USFamily NeVinfo - Unlimited internet - �rom $8.99/mo! ---
` J
�
`��
� � � �
J�� ��-� _
file:,�iC � 11i11/2QQ3
.
����
s
�
�
�� .
�.
�.
�:
�y
�
s
e
t�. ���
A ��.
��
� � �:
r , '
�
ira.� �, �
s
�ir. � y
' ie( -e
L
�
I
.°°:
F
t �'
LS_ �
' ' �
1� - i.�!
, a- ■r■.���—
`:>_:et �. f,'��
G
r. •
" �� . .��
I�
� c� � 1 � , .- �
�5�� s
A - �� �
�
z
Q
J
�
�
�
�
J
Li
J
w
�
w
J
�
�
z
�
0
0
z
Q
U
Y, �
i�`-�°a �a �
�
\
o M
Q
Z
O o �n
� iz
> o0
�a
� �� w
J - w
W
�- �
W i o
� J W
z <x
�f U W
� N
Q
�
z
¢
�
c�
G
5
c� y
.
•
�
�u .
n
�� .
uQ ._
_
.
•
z
�
Q
w
J
w
�
�
�
LL
X
�
• '�� �. � p n
E
\ 4
O
�
}-
w
t-
C
_ Z
o �
_I �
o -�
N a
II
= N
� Z
O
I�
J �
Q J
� W
�
�
W
F-
X
W
LL
° w �
¢� �
.
� �
� -
/�,q
V�_
Q
�
O
F
N
K
� -
F O }
N Q O
N �
h �
�
�
_
a��
o��
;`�
N
V r
d ¢
� V
O ¢
�V V O
V �
�
�
� s�
��03
C �KO
w�
<073v
a
Z
� Q
O J
I d
o w
N Z
O
" J
a W
��
W
� J
W�
J Z
Q y
U �
Vl Q
d
�
/ , 1
` J
.
�
„�,..^ t�,�
��,o
N
-E
U -
u� '
.i� .
�� 5 '
� � � a �. '7 $ 'J J � .
"eo� L "' J � o
� Q g
? . < �
• 'O J c ��
zr - 3 y�`w - _ 8
3C w� `. '-<�- - io°i �O � � �N �s
� I r - � ' �°� �� � �
- � ��J�_�
�� � .
o � —=--a�._.__, , - - -
� -- - ,4=
3 � -c__z.r________it__-_'_. -icr_'___�rE5'dSTY _ _ _ __' <
� .
z� i' _ . _- � " � -'
� _ � _ _ _ _ _ �o
___< -
�, ;
�..
�. � � wN
�
i � � ���
. t /^. i � � '- ?��� �
"_
� , �� � - i � r_'___� a�3
� i i ` `' ��
i o " -
� I i <' ' �� _ _"'_ `__ i i ' ��_.
. �._ ��l � ;>�
} - , t ��
�a t - `• �r �r \\;: g�� W ��
- � o
w LL �' � U o
_ _.._�`-_ •� __� . .
s _____ : w "
K _ i i :� � a�: a�
3�w ,@-.��1 -. .�.Z� ..��GL � .- I 2z�
z�� i � � - � , io��
ao � i � ' �\\�: o`
� __� ' � i �:�- ° � i i
-- 4 _ � � `' � —
� I � >
`� - ° I ;�
� �:: � _ -
�. — -, p �. , _ n
� ; o
-' '� ' s�.
�•
� L ; _
_ �. -- - _ � �
z
��-- � a
�
i `\� N� ^
i
i
�� '- � i ���' I I w�
_ i - � __' _i � _ > C
� � - w a
i � i � � ��w
o � � I�
• v°' i `____ J i - �'��'�I �I i � '� � , LL m w wr
^.� �L�Uf'I�_�� �
�� r � �� �N
____'i - - ' /, .a w v�
' ' s o
°zG i �� I I o °a
w � � _� �_ r ,.� ^ � , I . �m>
- � i i 3e� �$ � � � � � a, � �
a ' z \ °nU " �
� i �_ € �N �m � z � c~4, \ ����
p 6 I . � — m3
� j i _
� i�� P , U
'a`�i'� ______� • • - - , , i ji _ o
- i- w� � i� �i
S 2`- ji
� �. i'_T__� - ,.9-,E3 , .0-.Bt � .Oiod � - °o
m - ,�, i � �• _ �a°
�il
�, y � � � �, w� I��
o _i_ i" ,� ' , ,-. 'iI� � I�
� '__,_., . �5 �!z Il�� ,I��°a
- p ° , \i `� �
i � m �
� _i . ���� R:� �sQ �s dm
i`
° i i 5��
3'
d � � -� , _ � v 3 a�' �i 1
1' i � 3 tt ���,-4� �
I I 1
¢
� Z = \ i
� -1 I
Z o I -� •`' �^ ¢ 1� . �i �� .4
m w I -i . . fi \�� �
- -�.w _� i II ��.� `�c\.
e _'�" i T' i�. W
,�� . i ,' __ __ . _ _ liy !\ i � �
P � ' i i _____ i � `•��z� i � •� ;\ ' : o % .�
f I� •I � ag �'� � - .', ��,�'; �� �
'Q L ____ I . O#w �'
¢R[� - � e � t � , � , `� Y �.\ 'n
_ . .��..;. . 6A 1 ss�Ljl� �� �
O � .. . 1' -. . � �
p
� 1 U�j�
� . , .
� . ��•M1��i � ] i 1� �
i � � � _ ---- �. � o � _ �
- o a ; _ , , � ��� �, '�,
� ; � ' < i a"�-P i �}�� - � �
_ _ i� � � & -- __ ,.; _ . . � � � �-%' :.% aa �
�� � �� _-�� __ � . i �� ��
� ' - � x ., - , �NvxV�7J sNwam / � �� L 8
. � \ M �
1--- - -- -�` �. �nnyt u��,s',
�� - - - ��,�. , ,: -�-:,.-'- - _ ' - a
i '� � ' was: m,ss,oz.oN ; &_
ic� � ��
� ' i
� '- "�" "' J '
�
\ I
�
��
4:.
0
�
�
�,
� �
1
�:
��_...
�. .
. ��
� .� ,
��ft ` ... �,.;
�'#� �#
m
0
0
��
v
U
�
a
\
�
�
��. � .
�---�° --��
�
�
�
t� �
,�
I�
�
�� �
_�
�
'!
; r � �
�
r ! � �;5��'� Q �
4`nu f <� G�✓'� ��/
I'—_— i ' v
I � � a7is Ccf� /
�� 1 ) �
S /
---- 7 /
� � .�Ob � �
I �� / �..
✓ S�
`;'
' �— �.�. .Fb---,
� � \
U �
��.' � ��
�I ��
�/
oi
ok �'
� ��
�
�,%
W=;�=n
/ `� r �+
.� a \/� ��'' �C
C'F c r �.^tX."_:_y/� „�-' /
�� �^
1 �Zr.Mn / / —
�: ; �
�: �
�, : m
;
� �:
1 � 5��'
:�� � �
AJ=�
�I4 J
� r��-���
�� D /
�� eS�?x'
:, - U��d
.-� , }3Y��J�`
�h �I�
f I C �
U I =
' I
_ �I I
��
��,
�,�,�,:y
'ti
✓( �
•
�
•