Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/24/20042. 3. 4. 5. AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, August 24, 2004 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Agenda Approval of the July 27, 2004, Minutes Design Review: a. Maplewood Cancer Center - 1580 Beam Avenue b. Cottages at Legacy Village - Hazelwood Street Visitor Presentations: None Scheduled Board Presentations: a. August 9, 2004, City Council Meeting (Chesapeake Retail Center) Staff Presentations: a. Sign Code Revision Proposed Timeline b. Reschedule the September 14, 2004, Community Design Review Board Meeting Due to Primary Elections (September 15 or 167) c. Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning Workshop - August 26, 2004 d. Community Development Bus Tour Review e. Community Design Review Board Representation at the September 13, 2004, City Council Meeting (Cottages at Legacy Village). 9. Adjourn I1. III. IV. Vw DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JULY 27, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Diana Longrie-Kline Acting chairperson Ledvina Board member Judy Driscoll Board member Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Staff Present: Absent Present Present Present Present Shann Finwall, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary Rose Lorsunq, Planning Intern APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Olson moved to approve the agenda. Board member Shankar seconded. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for June 22, 2004. Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar Board member Driscoll seconded. The motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. Ayes --- Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar Chairperson Ledvina requested a change to the minutes on page 9, 5th paragraph to clean up the wording in the second sentence. It should read: However, the ideal situation would have been re-have the development of the front lots and this back lot ~tevelepe~ at the same time. Board member Shankar moved approval of the minutes of June 22, 2004, as amended. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Legacy Village Concept Lighting Plan Ms. Finwall said the Maplewood Public Works Department is proposing to develop design standards for street lighting in the Legacy Village development area. Street lighting is proposed to be installed as part of the city's improvements along Kennard Street between Beam Avenue and County Road D and along Legacy Parkway between Hazelwood Street and Southlawn Drive. City staff has retained the consultant team of Kimley-Horn & Associates and Cain-Ouse Associates to assist in the development of a master street lighting plan for Legacy Village. Kimley-Horn and Cain-Ouse are currently investigating options for the street lighting. In addition, they will also develop street lighting standards for the Legacy Village Development under the direction of staff, the Community Design Review Board and the City Council. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Jon Horn, of Kimley-Horn & Associates addressed the board. Their hope is to take this lighting plan to the city council on August 9, 2004, for city council approval. If this is approved they will begin taking bids with the hope that the street lighting would be installed late this fall or early winter 2004, however, some of the lighting may be delayed until spring 2005 in coordination with some of the other construction activity. Mr. Cain said he had three street lighting options to present to the board for feedback. Chairperson Ledvina asked if there would be street lighting on both sides of the street? Mr. Horn said the intention from maintenance prospective, is to have the street lighting installed on the outside curb lines of Kennard Street. Chairperson Ledvina was under the impression the developer is coordinating and funding the construction of Legacy Parkway. He asked why the developer was not proposing the street lighting? Mr. Horn said the piece of Legacy Parkway through the Town and Country development is actually a city improvement project. The funding mechanism is assessed through the developer and the developer is paying the bulk of the cost and the lighting is being constructed as part of the public improvement. However, the developer is doing the landscaping in the area. Chairperson Ledvina presumed the applicant was in close contact with the developer in terms of their ideas on how this works with their design and with the buildings? Mr. Horn said they've had conversations with the Hartford Group and Town and Country Homes in terms of their intention for the street lighting design as well as the landscaping. The Hartford Group has provided some general thoughts and ideas of which they are addressing with the lighting options. Town and Country Homes was in general agreement with the lighting choices but they are looking for direction and receiving ideas from the board. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Mr. Jay Cain, of Cain-Ouse Associates addressed the board. He had three different lighting options to show the board. The first option was a more traditional light called the Sun Valley Lantern. It is a cast aluminum pole with a high-pressure sodium lamp. One disadvantage with this type of light is that it has a visible light source and is more expensive because it would require more lamps to be used. An advantage is that the light source is only 12 to 15 feet from the ground and is a more Iow key light source. Board member Olson asked if this type of lamp is easily breakable? Her concern was kids throwing rocks at the glass and breaking it and what the expense would be to replace the glass. Mr. Cain said that's an important consideration with this type of lamp. He wasn't sure but he believed the glass was tempered glass. Board member Olson asked if the city would be responsible for replacing and fixing the lamps or would the developer incur the cost? Mr. Cain said the city would own and maintain these lights on the main streets and be responsible for the maintenance. Board member Shankar asked what color the light poles would be? Mr. Cain said the exact color has not been determined yet but they would use a conservative color. Board member Shankar asked if they would be using more than one color light pole? Mr. Cain said the intent is to use one color for all of the light poles. The second lighting choice is called Domas. This light is made of aluminum and the light source is high-pressured sodium. Because this light has a concealed and downcast light source, you cannot see the light source. They would require fewer lampposts with this type of lighting. There is a shepards hook at the top of the lamp where they could put a logo or piece of metal. They could also add decorations like a maple leaf on the top of the lamp. He did not have a sample of this type of decoration to show the board but described what it could look like. Board member Olson asked who would be determining the light color? Mr. Horn said they would like light color ideas as well as design details from the board. Board member Driscoll asked if the Domas light had to have a concrete base as shown in the example? Mr. Cain said no, in fact they would use a pre-engineered steel base that is screwed into the ground and the electricity goes up into the hollow cylinder of the post. Board member Driscoll asked what other colors the Domas light post was available in other than the blue that was shown in the photo? Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 4 Mr. Cain said they could get the light posts in just about any color. But they haven't had discussions regarding color preferences. Mr. Cain said the third lighting option is called Harmonia. This light is a bit contemporary and old fashioned at the same time. It has a visible light source, is a very popular light fixture used in developments and comes in unlimited colors. Board member Driscoll asked why seeing the light source can be a disadvantage? Mr. Cain said some people think if you can see where the light source comes from it's the wrong type of lighting. There is a movement called the Dark Sky Movement to prevent lighting from polluting the night sky and the visibility of the stars. Some people prefer more of a down cast light and some like it to shine outward. Some angles of light can be a distraction or a nuisance. Chairperson Ledvina said whichever lighting is selected the lighting should be as efficient as possible. The light should be directed downward and to the intended area you're trying to light as opposed to fully directional luminescence fixtures. He prefers a more traditional light fixture with a downward light. So far none of the samples shown are his preference. Mr. Cain said there are different things they can do with the light fixtures to alter the appearance. They can't change the light direction but they can make it better. Board member Shankar said the Sun Valley Lantern is too traditional for him and prefers the Harmonia light fixture. Board member Shankar, Olson and Chairperson Ledvina said they didn't prefer the Domas light fixture because it was too plain and needed more ornamentation. Board member Olson said she didn't care for the Domas or the Harmonia. She would like to see a light fixture that blends the best of the three lights together. She was uncomfortable with the glass globes hanging down and felt it could invite future high maintenance issues for the City of Maplewood. Mr. Cain asked board members if there were more decorative features added to the Domas light fixture would they then be okay with it? Board member Olson said she is concerned with the style of the light fixtures and the residents having light shining into their homes with the units built so close to the roadway. Mr. Cain said the residents would not be flooded with light using the Domas light fixture; and using the Harmonia and the Sun Valley Lantern they would only be slightly affected. The advantage of using the Domas light fixture is that the light is directed downward. Chairperson Ledvina said he would further encourage the involvement of the developer in these discussions for a final decision. They've spent a lot of time with the design and will have some very good ideas in terms of lighting styles and how it fits in with the land use plan for their structures. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Mr. Horn said he understands the board's comments that the Domas lighting series would work if it was more decorative and as it stands the Domas fixture doesn't add enough character to the area. He also understands the board that the Sun Valley Lantern and the Harmonia would be more of a maintenance issue and the light extends outward instead of downward. In order for the board to select one of the choices something would have to be done to fix the issues they described. Board member Driscoll said personally she liked the Sun Valley Lantern design. Chairperson Ledvina said he is concerned about the efficiency of the lighting and is not sure how the design feature of the lamp would work in the development. Mr. Horn said they would need to run through a cost analysis as well before making a decision on the lighting. Board members said they prefer earth tones or a darker color light fixture with a satin finish. Board member Driscoll said there might be another vendor that has more of the lighting features the board is looking for. Mr. Cain said it sounded like the board would like the lighting to be more dressed up and that the light shines downward. Board member Olson asked if the lighting plan would be coming back to the board after they made a final decision? Mr. Horn said they were hoping to work through the issues with the developer and bring this to the city council on August 9, 2004. Board member Olson said she thinks the metal insert detail in the Domas light fixture is an excellent idea and would've liked to see a sample of what they had proposed to use. Mr. Horn said they could come back to the board and show them the metal insert detail options separate from the lighting, fixtures themselves. Other cities that have used the Domas lighting fixture with the metal insert detail are Arbor Lakes in Maple Grove and Burnsville Center in Burnsville. Board member Olson said she would like to see a maple leaf cut out to replicate the city logo and would like to see a finial at the top of the light fixture. Mr. Cain said they could do that. Chairperson Ledvina and Board member Driscoll agreed with the decorative suggestions. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 b. Chesapeake Retail Center - 1) Buffalo Wild Wings Restaurant Ms. Finwall said on May 24, 2004, the city council approved the Chesapeake Retail Center development located at 3091 White Bear Avenue. Land use approvals included a preliminary plat, planned unit development, and design review of three buildings including Jared Jewelers, TGI Fridays, and Buffalo Wild Wings. Because of Buffalo Wild Wing's change in their corporate building image, Chesapeake Companies is now requesting an amendment to the community design review board conditions in order to construct an alternative Buffalo Wild Wings building design. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Jeff Wurst, Development Manager, Chesapeake Companies, Minnetonka, addressed the board. He thanked the board for the opportunity to bring this design back for review. He said there are two other representatives from Buffalo Wild Wings here to answer questions and recommended Mr. Doug Paquay come to the podium to speak. Mr. Doug Paquay, Director of Construction, Buffalo Wild Wings, St. Louis Park, addressed the board. On the east and west elevation they plan on adding the same awning and window treatment that they have on the front or north elevation. They will put a set of windows with the awning and window treatment shown on the front elevation on either side of the bump out to equalize the building. Chairperson Ledvina asked if they are agreeable to the brick wainscoting on the east elevation where the bump out is going to be located on the ring road. Mr. Paquay said they were receptive to the brick, but would suggest only a 2-foot high wainscot. In the past using the brick wainscoting up to the windows has made the building look heavy at the base of the building. The windows are almost 3¼ feet high on the building. Board member Shankar asked if the yellow, black and white colors shown on the plans would be constructed of EIFS? Mr. Paquay said the black and white shown is done with metal panels inset in the EIFS. The yellow and brown portion of the building shown is done in EIFS and then there is a brick base. The awnings over the window will be black and yellow. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the yellow squares on the building elevations would be built of EIFS? Mr. Paquay said the yellow squares are made of a LED square panel of light that would glow at night. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the yellow squares could be added to the west elevation? Mr. Paquay said probably. They are going to have false windows on that side of the building so it may not be necessary to add squares there. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 7 Chairperson Ledvina asked if the applicant had revised elevations for the board to review this evening? Mr. Paquay said no he did not. Chairperson Ledvina asked if this building design had been built anywhere else? Mr. Paquay said they have buildings with this design in Irving, Texas and in Georgia, but they have not built this new design anywhere in Minnesota. Board member Olson asked staff if the yellow squares that are lit with LED lights fits in with the photometric plan? Ms. Finwall said any wall pack lighting would have to be included in the photometrics plan. Mr. Paquay said the LED lights are so faint they would not even register. Board member Olson said the CDRB recommended to the city council that they allow a four- foot high fence around the patio area. The council wanted a six-foot high fence because of the liquor license. She asked if the design of the fence area would still be six feet high even with the brick at the base, the glass, and then the black checkering along the top? Mr. Paquay said yes. The panels of glass are made of tempered glass. The city council wanted a fence but Buffalo Wild Wings wanted to be able to see the patio so they chose to use the tempered glass. Mr. Wurst said the staff recommendation is to replace the CMU around the bottom perimeter of the building with brick and Buffalo Wild Wings is willing to do that. From an architectural standpoint they request that the brick not be carried up to the bottom of the windows but rather remain at the existing height as shown with the new brick material. The recommendation is based on the architecture of the building and that the width along the bottom of the building meshes with the other architectural features. He would ask that the applicant not be required to install a window on the south elevation because they don't feel it's necessary with the landscaping, and trash enclosure screening in that location. Board member Shankar moved to approve Chesapeake Companies' proposed design review change for a revised Buffalo Wild Wings building at the Chesapeake Retail Center located at 3091 White Bear Avenue. These changes are based on the revised Buffalo Wild Wing's building elevations and landscape plan date-stamped June 28, 2004. The developer or owner shall do the following: (changes made during the 7/27/04 community design review board meeting are underlined if added and stricken if deleted): Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for all three buildings for this project (Buildings B, C, and D). 2. Submit the following to city staff prior to issuance of a grading or building permit: Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 ao eo Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department's April 26, 2004, engineering plan review as well as the following: A westward extension of the retaining wall south of Building D (Jared Jewelers). The retaining wall height must be sufficient to create a prevailing ground slope away from Building D, thereby deflecting a potential flow from a pipeline leak. Obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the existing Maplewood Movie I Theatre building. Obtain the required Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District permits. Submit payment for all required Park Access Charges (PAC fees) as specified in the Park Director's April 14, 2004, correspondence to Chesapeake Companies. Submit an easement agreement that governs and provides for legal cross easements for parking, access, and utilities between all lots within the project. Submit an easement agreement for the installation and maintenance of a freestanding sign on Lot 1 to benefit Lot 2. Submit an owner's association agreement specifying responsibilities for insurance, taxes and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities (including snow plowing). Submit a revised site plan showing the following: 1) The dedication of 10 feet of additional right-of-way along White Bear Avenue. 2) The dedication of 17 feet of additional right-of-way along County Road D. 3) Building C (TGI Fridays) and Building D (Jared Jewelers) shifted approximately five feet to the south, or a lesser distance, to accommodate a future driveway located to the north of Building C that would extend onto White Bear Avenue. 4) Pending continued cooperation with the adjacent property owner, show the location of a driveway and pedestrian cross-access on the south side of the property, to accommodate entrance and egress to and from the southerly property (3065 White Bear Avenue). 5) The extension of the sidewalk in front of Building A (future retail/restaurant) onto the County Road D trail. 6) A pedestrian access extending from the White Bear Avenue sidewalk. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 A revised landscape plan, subject to review and approval by staff, that shows the following: 1) Pending a shared driveway scenario with Arby's, a revised landscape plan showing the area of disturbance and landscaping proposed. 2) Seven additional trees on the west side of the property, between the sidewalk and the Maplewood Mall road. 3) Additional plantings in front of Jared Jeweler's dumpster enclosure to help screen the enclosure from White Bear Avenue. 4) A foundation landscape plan for TGI Fridays and Buffalo Wild Wings. These plans should be consistent and complement the overall landscaping and Jared Jeweler's foundation plantings, and should ensure appropriate plantings in front of all dumpster enclosures to ensure screening from the roadways. 5) An underground irrigation plan to ensure all landscaping is irrigated per city code. jo Revised building and dumpster enclosure elevations showing the following: TGI Fridays: 1) Removal of the EIFS building material and replacement with ef brick, granite, and/or stone building materials and consistent building detail, including parapet walls, on all elevations of the building. 2) Dumpster and recycling enclosure constructed of quality building materials to match the building. The enclosure must be at least 6 feet high and have a 100-percent opaque gate. Jared Jewelers: 1) Dumpster and recycling enclosure constructed of quality building materials to match the building. The enclosure must be at least 6 feet high and have a 100-percent opaque gate. Buffalo Wild Wings: 1) The removal of the split face C.M.U. on all elevations and the replacement with a brick wainscot. 'thc w=!nccot ,,,,,., ,,,,+,,,,,~ from ...... '~ "'"'~" +'' *~'" bott. cms cf thc ';;bdc';:c. The brick must be compatible with the building. 2) The addition of windows (either true or false windows), or other design elements to help break up the wall on the south, west, and east elevations. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 lO 3) The addition of yellow LED panels to the west elevation. The removal of the concrete masonry block under the Plexiglas fence, and replacement with brick, which is compatible with the building. The overall height of the fence is not to exceed 6 feet. S)4 Dumpster and recycling enclosure constructed of quality building materials to match the building. The enclosure must be at least 6 feet high and have a 100-percent opaque gate. 6_). ,=~-)-A 6-foot high fence around the proposed outdoor patio to be approved by the city council prior to issuance of a liquor license for Buffalo Wild Wings. A revised outdoor lighting and photometric plan. The revised plan shall show the exact location, height, and style of all outdoor lights. The light illumination from all outdoor lights may not exceed .4-foot-candles at all property lines. I. A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 3. Prior to issuance of sign permits, the following must be submitted: a. Sign elevations for Buildings B, C, and D as follows: 1) One freestanding sign, 25 feet in height and 100 square feet in area. Freestanding sign height must be measured from building grade to top of the sign, not ground grade to top of sign. The TGI Friday's and Jared Jeweler's freestanding signs must maintain a 5-foot setback to the White Bear Avenue right-of-way and a 10-foot setback to all side property lines. The Buffalo Wild Wing's freestanding sign must maintain a 1-foot setback to the County Road D right-of-way and a 5-foot setback to the side property line. All three freestanding signs must have a decorative base constructed of quality building materials to match the corresponding buildings. 2) Three wall signs per building, only one per elevation. Size of the wall sign is limited to 20 percent of the gross wall area on which the sign is attached. Wall signs are not permitted on a canopy. b. A detailed landscape plan for the base of all three proposed freestanding signs. 4. Complete the following before occupying the buildings: a. Install all required exterior improvements. b. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets. 5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 ]! ao The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer. All work shall follow the approved plans. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes to the plans, including a change to the site plan for the proposed future driveway access onto White Bear Avenue, pending Ramsey County engineer and city engineer approval. Building ^ and signs associated with Building ^ are not included in this community design review approval. Board member Driscoll seconded. Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on August 9, 2004. 2) Multi-Tenant Building Ms. Finwall said on May 24, 2004, the city council approved the Chesapeake Retail Center development located at 3091 White Bear Avenue. Chesapeake Companies is now requesting design review approval of their proposed multi-tenant building to be located on the northwest corner of the site. The proposed multi-tenant building will be 9,620 square feet in area and 22 feet, 8 inches in height. It will be constructed of face brick, an exterior insulation finish system (EIFS-a stucco like material), colored rock face, and clear glass windows. Because all four elevations of the multi-tenant building will be very visible, each elevation should be constructed of the same quality materials. Staff recommends that the west elevation (toward the Maplewood Mall private road) be revised to reflect a 2-foot, 8-inch high colored rock face wainscot on the bottom of the wall (matching the other three elevations), with the remainder of the wall, up to the EIFS, constructed of face brick. In addition, staff recommends additional screening of the mechanical units with an extension of the parapet walls or other means. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the board would see signage on the south elevation of the building? Ms. Finwall said staff recommends wall signage be located on the east and west elevation facing the parking lot and the ring road. Board member Olson asked staff what type of signage would be used on this multi-tenant building? Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Ms. Finwall said currently the code states the signage can be up to 20% of the gross wall area for the tenant frontage, which could include a cabinet sign or individual letters. Chairperson Ledvina asked if this type of building qualifies for a comprehensive sign plan? Ms. Finwall said the city sign code requires a comprehensive sign plan for multi-tenant buildings with five or more tenants but staff is not sure how many tenants they plan on having in this multi-tenant building. However, because of the overall PUD and sign requirements the CDRB in essence is approving a comprehensive sign plan. Board member Shankar asked if staff is recommending that the parapet walls extend up all around the building? Ms. Finwall said staff was recommending additional screening to screen the mechanical units on the roof of the building, which could be done by extending the parapet walls around the roofline. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Steven Doughty, Architect with Pope Associates, St. Paul, addressed the board. They have a materials board for the board to review. They have adjusted the roof and parapet wall elevation, which will screen the rooftop units. Regarding the signage they will have a junction box provided at each sign location on the front and west elevation and prepped for each tenant's internally illuminated sign. Board member Olson asked if they had a standard size they would propose the tenants conform to or would they allow the tenants to chose their sign preference? Mr. Wurst said the plan for the building would be to have the signs consistent with the individual tenants trademark identity signage. That was approved by the city council for the three other buildings and they contemplated doing the same for the multi-tenant building. They will follow the city sign code but beyond that they did not anticipate any additional restrictions other than using the 20% coverage of the tenant wall space. Board member Olson asked if they were proposing to use a standard illuminated box that the clients can screen their personal Iogos on? Mr. Wurst said the intention was to allow the tenants use their trademark signage whether it is channel letters or cabinet type signage. This is consistent with the way the TGI Fridays, Buffalo Wild Wings and Jared Jeweler buildings had been addressed for signage. Board member Olson said however, those are three individual building units and this is a single building structure. Mr. Wurst said he understood. Mr. Wurst said they have not marketed the building at this point but he imagined there would be four maybe five tenants in the building. The multi-tenant building exceeds the height of a typical sized building so the building is already taller and would be adequately screened so you could not see the rooftop units on the roof of the building. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Board member Driscoll said she is concerned about the signage on the building because it sounds like there can be variations in color and materials used. It seems like this is such a big portion of the building and maybe this should be addressed. Mr. Wurst said the Simon Property owners group of the Maplewood Mall stated they have a preference for individual channel letters. The signage for the building has to go through the City of Maplewood for approval and to the Simon Property group for approval. To an extent they are being policed by the Simon Property group with their preference for channel letters, which governs the overall mall area. Chairperson Ledvina asked staff for comments on the comprehensive sign plan and the elevations. Ms. Finwall said staff recommended the face brick on the west elevation be substituted for the rock face because of the visibility of that elevation to the Maplewood Mall ring road. However, staff originally required trees and other landscaping along that elevation, which would help screen the area. Because this is a PUD, the city was able to require specific sign conditions, so the sign requirements are in essence a comprehensive sign plan. She would recommend individual channel letters be used as opposed to the cabinet style signage. If the board wanted to include that language it could be added to page 4 item 3. Chairperson Ledvina agreed with staff's recommendation to have a darker brick on the west elevation. He thinks it would help to improve the overall visual impression of the building. He thinks the west elevation should look like the east elevation and should have the darker brick brought all the way up the column. He would also support staff's recommendation for the signage and feels it should be consistent. Board member Olson agreed. She would rather see a variety of signage on the building and not see uniform signage all the way across the building in the same color and lettering such as the St. Paul Business Center off 35E and Roselawn Avenue. Mr. Wurst asked the board if it would be okay for Chesapeake Companies to work with staff on the sign plan? Chairperson Ledvina said that would be agreeable to the board. Mr. Wurst said the applicant would prefer to use a quality material other than the brick product the board is recommending to use. Using the thicker brick product would decrease the size of the interior of the building. Board member Shankar asked if they would be opposed to the 2-foot 8-inch high rock face CMU band on the west elevation? Mr. Wurst said they are supportive of a rock cast product could continuing around the west elevation to be consistent with the rest of the building. Mr. Doughty said if they use the rock cast product that would be a 4-inch veneer that would add to the depth of the building and would reduce the size of the building by 4 inches. They would prefer to use the rock face block and match the cream colored block. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 14 Board member Shankar said his personal feeling is that would add the required amount of differentiation the board is looking for without adding brick on the west side. Board member Olson is okay with changing the color on the top of the columns. She asked if the board is requesting the applicant add wainscoting all the way around the back of the building? Board member Shankar said yes the applicant should add wainscoting 2-feet 8-inches high. Board member Olson is fine using a veneer product but the issue of changing the structural parts from rock cast to a block with a veneer product sounds like the applicant preferred not to do that. Her concern is that the products match in color or texture if at all possible. Board member Shankar asked if the applicant could go over the materials board. Mr. Doughty reviewed the materials as they would be used on the building. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant if they were really that concerned about adding four inches to the building exterior, which equals 50 square feet less in a 10,000 square foot building? Mr. Doughty said yes they are. Board member Shankar moved to approve Chesapeake Companies' multi-tenant building and landscape plans date-stamped May 27, 2004, to be located within the Chesapeake Retail Center development at 3091 White Bear Avenue. The developer or owner shall do the following: (changes made during the 7/27104 CDRB meeting are underlined if added and stricken if deleted.) Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for the multi- tenant building. 2. Submit the following to city staff prior to issuance of a grading or building permit: ao Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department's April 26, 2004, engineering plan review as well as the following: A westward extension of the retaining wall south of Building D (Jared Jewelers). The retaining wall height must be sufficient to create a prevailing ground slope away from Building D, thereby deflecting a potential flow from a pipeline leak. Obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the existing Maplewood Movie I Theatre building. c. Obtain the required RamseyNVashington Metro Watershed District permits. do Submit payment for all required Park Access Charges (PAC fees) as specified in the Park Director's April 14, 2004, correspondence to Chesapeake Companies. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 ]5 Submit an easement agreement that governs and provides for legal cross easements for parking, access, and utilities between all lots within the project. fo Submit an easement agreement for the installation and maintenance of a freestanding sign on Lot 1 to benefit Lot 2. go Submit an owner's association agreement specifying responsibilities for insurance, taxes and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities (including snow plowing) h. Submit a revised site plan showing the following: 1) The dedication of 10 feet of additional right-of-way along White Bear Avenue. 2) The dedication of 17 feet of additional right-of-way along County Road D. 3) Pending continuation cooperation with the adjacent property owner, show the location of a driveway and pedestrian cross-access on the south side of the property, to accommodate entrance and egress to and from the southerly property (3065 White Bear Avenue). 4) The extension of the sidewalk in front of Building A (future retail/restaurant) onto the County Road D trail. 5) A pedestrian access extending from the White Bear Avenue sidewalk. A revised landscape plan, subject to review and approval by staff, that shows the following: 1) Pending a shared driveway scenario with Arby's, a revised landscape plan showing the area of disturbance and landscaping proposed. 2) Seven additional trees on the west side of the property, between the sidewalk and the Maplewood Mall road. 3) Additional plantings in front of Jared Jeweler's dumpster enclosure to help screen the enclosure from White Bear Avenue. 4) A foundation landscape plan for TGI Fridays and Buffalo Wild Wings. These plans should be consistent and complement the overall landscaping and Jared Jeweler's foundation plantings, and should ensure appropriate plantings in front of all dumpster enclosures to ensure screening from the roadways. 5) An underground irrigation plan to ensure all landscaping is irrigated per city code. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 16 Revised building elevations to be approved by staff prior to issuance of a buildinq permit showinq the following: 1) The west elevation (toward the Maplewood Mall private road) must be revised as follows: A 2-foot, 8-inch-high colored rock face wainscot on the bottom of the wall (matching the other three elevations). b. The colored rock-face C.M.U. extending from the rock face wainscot to the EIFS must be of a color that matches or is compatible to the darker brick on the building. The pilasters must have a 2-foot, 8-inch-hi.qh colored rock face wainscot with fact brick extendinq from the rock face wainscot to the top of the pilaster. 2) p ..... + .... " .... +~'"- m~.".s Revised elevations of all sides of the building showinq the drop of the roof elevation and extension of the parapet walls to ensure screeninq of the rooftop mechanical equipment from White Bear Avenue and County Road D. ko A revised outdoor lighting and photometric plan. The revised plan shall show the exact location, height, and style of all outdoor lights. The light illumination from all outdoor lights may not exceed .4-foot-candles at all property lines. A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. Prior to issuance of sign permits for the multi-tenant building, the following must be submitted: Sign elevations and plans for one freestanding sign, which cannot exceed 25 feet in height and 150 square feet in area. The freestanding sign height must be measured from building grade to top of the sign, not ground grade to top of sign. The multi-tenant freestanding sign must maintain a l-foot setback to the County Road D right-of-way and a 5-foot setback from the private mall road. The freestanding sign must have a decorative base constructed of quality building materials to match the multi-tenant building. A comprehensive siqn plan showinq the proposed sign elevations for all tenant wall signs. ~I"" ~t .... +I,,,,o ~,,, ~t~ + .... + .... I~ ~""° Wall signs limited to two wall signs per tenant. Wall signs can be placed on the east and west elevations only. Size of the wall sign is limited to 20 percent of the gross wall area of each tenant frontage. Wall siqns are limited to Ioqos and channel letters only. Wall signs are not permitted on a canopy. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 17 4. Complete the following before occupying the buildings: a. Install all required exterior improvements. b. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets. 5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer. All work shall follow the approved plans. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes to the plans, including a change to the site plan for the proposed future driveway access onto White Bear Avenue, pending Ramsey County engineer and city engineer approval. Board member Driscoll seconded. Ayes- Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on August 9, 2004. c. Maplewood Auto Center- 2525 White Bear Avenue Ms. Finwall said on April 22, 2003, the community design review board (CDRB) approved a comprehensive sign plan amendment and design review change for the Maplewood Auto Center located at 2525 White Bear Avenue. A condition of approval was that Building A (auto repair building) be repainted in its entirety within two years of the date of approval (April 22, 2005). If new colors were proposed for the building, the community design review board must review the change. Ms. Finwall showed a current photo of the Maplewood Auto Center to the board and provided a paint sample of the new paint color in beige. Board member Olson said the applicant has had a lot of mechanical problems with their freestanding sign at Maplewood Auto Center and she is happy he is fixing up the sign. Board member OIson moved to approve Brian Pellowski's request for a design review change for the Maplewood Auto Center at 2525 White Bear Avenue to include painting Building A from green to beige subject to the following conditions: (approved CDRB changes to the original conditions are underlined if added and stricken if deleted): Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Approval of the plans by the Community Design Review Board does not constitute approval of a building permit. All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screening enclosures with a 100 percent opaque wooden gate and shall be a color and material compatible with the building. Enclosures shall be protected by concrete-filled steel posts, or the equivalent, and anchored in the ground at the front corners of the structure. If the enclosure is masonry, the protective posts may be omitted. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, all dumpsters must be stored within the approved dumpster enclosure. Any exterior building or rooftop equipment that is not adequately screened by the parapet shall be additionally screened and hidden from view. Parking areas shall be striped and all bituminous areas shall have continuous concrete curbing. Parking lots shall be kept in a continual state of repair. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, the applicant must repair and restripe the entire parking lot to include repair of replacement of all concrete curbing. This work must be done prior to issuance of sign permits for the Super America sign changeover, or after submittal of a letter of credit or escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the required work. o If construction has not begun within two years of approval, board review shall be repeated. Site security lighting shall be provided and shall be directed or shielded so not to cause any undue glare onto adjacent properties or roadways. If any adjacent property is disturbed or property irons removed due to construction of the site, that property shall be restored and irons replaced by the applicant. Grading, drainage and utility plans shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. Any erosion control plan, acceptable to the city engineer, shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit for erosion control during construction. The curb cut along White Bear Avenue shall properly blend in to match the sidewalk grade. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the applicant shall obtain approval from Ramsey County for the curb cut and for the realignment of the drainage ditch. 11. The exit to White Bear Avenue shall have only one exit lane, a no left turn sign and stop sign. 12. All grass areas along the south and east lot lines shall be sod, not seed. Those areas adjacent to the ditch shall be sod or seed. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 13. All required landscape areas shall be continually and property maintained. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, the applicant must ensure that all previously required landscaping is installed and/or maintained. The city will retain the August 24, 2004, letter of credit for the required landscaping until such work is complete. 14. All required plant materials that die shall be replaced by the owner within one year. 15. Reflectorized stop signs and handicap parking signs shall be provided. 16. All public boulevards that are disturbed due to this construction shall be restored and resodded. 17. The applicant shall provide a monetary guarantee, in the form acceptable to staff, in the amount of 150 percent of the established cost of any site improvements that are not completed by occupancy. 18. The parking stall depth and drive aisle widths north and south of Building B shall be 19 feet and 24 feet. 19. There shall be no outside storage or displays of products or merchandise. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, all outside storage and unlicensed vehicles must be removed from the site. 20. Building A and the pylon sign in front of Buildinq A must be painted the following colors by October 15, 2004: Upper and lower fascia: beige (Apache 432) Trim, garage doors, and bollards: green Upper face of pylon sign: beige (Apache 432) 21. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, Building B must be painted the following colors: white on the top fascia, garage doors, window trim, bollards and wall lights; light grey on the middle section of the block; and red on the top flashing. Elevations showing the above-described colors for Building B must be approved by staff. This work must be complete prior to issuance of sign permits for the Super America sign changeover, or after submittal of a letter of credit or escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the required work. 22. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Board member Driscoll seconded. The motion passed. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS VIII. IX, 20 Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar No visitors present. BOARD PRESENTATIONS Board member Olson announced that the city council decided they would not be voting for the chairpersons on each board and commission. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Sign Code Revision Update Ms. Finwall introduced Ms. Rose Lorsung, Planning Intern, to the board. Rose has been working on the Maplewood Sign Code Study and presented her report. The board said they appreciated the work that was done on the sign code. The board will review the packet of information and return to the CDRB meeting on August 24, 2004, with questions and concerns. Community Development Bus Tour - Wednesday August 11, 2004, (5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.) Ms. Finwall reminded board members of the annual city tour and asked which members would be attending. Community Design Review Board representation at the August 9, 2004, city council meeting. Board member Shankar volunteered to be the CDRB representative at the August 9, 2004, city council meeting. Items to discuss include the Chesapeake Retail Center at 3091 White Bear Avenue for Buffalo Wild Wings Restaurant and the Multi-Tenant Building. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM Richard Fursman, City Manager Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Design Review for the Maplewood Cancer Center Minnesota Oncology Hematology - Maplewood 1580 Beam Avenue August 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION Minnesota Oncology Hematology is proposing an addition to the Maplewood Cancer Center located at 1580 Beam Avenue. This project includes a 7,952-square-foot addition off the back (south) side of their building. The addition is proposed to house radiation equipment currently being leased by the cancer center and operated out of a temporary trailer that is currently parked in the back parking lot three days per week. (Refer to the narrative and plans attached on pages 6 through 13.) DISCUSSION Building Addition The project includes the removal of 21 parking stalls in the back parking lot to make room for the proposed 7,952-square-foot addition. Exterior materials used in the addition include brick, aluminum windows, and metal fascia to match the existing building. City staff finds the addition attractive and compatible, but suggests that the new and existing rooftop units visible from the street and property to the south (Markham Pond Medical Office Building) be screened, or at a minimum, painted to match the building. Parking The city's parking requirements for a medical office building is one parking stall per 200 square feet of gross floor area. The gross floor area of the Maplewood Cancer Center after the addition will be 21,900 square feet, with a required 110 parking stalls. The Maplewood Cancer Center will have 113 parking stalls after the addition, which exceeds code. Grading/Drainage Bob Wiegert of Paramount Engineering and Design calculated the pervious areas for both the existing and proposed conditions. The areas are 23,999 square feet (existing) and 24,329 square feet (proposed) respectively, resulting in an additional 300 square feet of pervious surface after the addition. Paramount is proposing to utilize storm water best management practices by installing a sump structure. Chuck Vermeersch, engineer with the City of Maplewood, reviewed the grading and drainage plan and indicates that there are no engineering related issues in regard to the building addition. Mr. Vermeersch states, however, that the applicant should submit a copy of the final plan to the Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Department for sewer and water access charge adjustments. This needs to be done before a building permit can be issued. Landscaping Foundation plantings proposed around the new addition include 2 amur maples, 17 Korean lilacs, 30 spireas, 3 dogwoods, and 14 daylilies. City staff finds the landscaping acceptable, except for the proposed amur maples, which have been identified by the city's nature center as a troublesome invasive. Staff recommends the replacement of the 2 amur maples with an alternative ornamental tree. Lighting There are eight existing freestanding lights on the site. These lights are mounted on 30-foot poles with a 3-foot base, for an overall height of 33 feet. The lights are a dark bronze with a sharp cutoff to ensure efficient lighting. In order to accommodate the proposed addition, the Maplewood Cancer Center will be required to relocate two of the existing parking lot lights, and install one new light. City code allows freestanding lights to be a maximum of 25 feet in height. The community design review board may allow taller light poles as part of a design review, based on appropriateness for a specific proposal. The Maplewood Cancer Center is requesting a waiver to the freestanding light-height requirement of 25 feet in order to relocate the two existing 30-foot-high and install a new 30-foot-high light pole. They indicate that the installation of three 20-foot-high poles, with 3-foot bases, will not be compatible to the remaining five 30-foot-high light poles, as well as add expense to the project. The photometrics submitted for the project reflects that the two relocated and one new 30-foot- high light poles and fixtures meet the city's light illumination requirements of .4-foot-candles, or less, of light illumination at all property lines. City staff finds the relocation of the two existing light poles and installation of one new 30-foot- high light pole to be compatible and acceptable to the overall project and recommends approval of the taller light poles as proposed. Dumpster Enclosure There is an existing dumpster enclosure located in the rear parking lot. This enclosure is 6 feet in height, is constructed of brick to match the building, and has a 100 percent opaque cedar fence. With the addition, the existing dumpster enclosure will remain. OTHER COMMENTS David Fisher, Building Official: The building is required to be fire sprinklered to meet NFPA 13. The building is required to meet 2000 IBC, 2000 IFC, 2000 IMC, NEC State Plumbing Code and the Minnesota State Building Code. RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans date-stamped July 23, 2004, for the Maplewood Cancer Center located at 1580 Beam Avenue. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. Maplewood Cancer Center 2 August 18, 2004 Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant must submit to staff for approval the following items: a. Proof of the submittal of a copy of final plans to the Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Department for sewer and water access charge adjustments. b. Revised building elevations showing the screening, or at a minimum, painting of the existing and proposed roof-top mechanical equipment to ensure screening from the street and/or property located to the south (Markham Pond Medical Office Building). c Revised landscape plan showing the replacement of amur maples with an alternative ornamental tree. d Watershed district approval. e. A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: a. Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. b. Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways. c. Install all required landscaping and an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. d. Screen or paint the rooftop mechanical equipment to match the building color. e. Install all required outdoor lighting. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer. The director of community development may All work shall follow the approved plans. approve minor changes. Maplewood Cancer Center 3 August 18, 2004 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: Existing Land Use: 2.55 acres Medical Office Building SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: East: West: Beam Avenue and St. John's Hospital beyond (zoned Business Commercial, BC) Markham Pond Medical Office Building (zoned Business Commercial Modified, BCM) Vacant Land (zoned Business Commercial Modified, BCM) Maplewood Professional Building (zoned Business Commercial Modified, BCM) PLANNING Existing Land Use Plan: Existing Zoning: Business Commercial Modified, BCM Business Commercial Modified, BCM CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Design Review Section 2-290 of the city code requires that the community design review board make the following findings to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments, and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. Maplewood Cancer Center 4 August 18, 2004 Application Date The city received the complete applications and plans for this development on July 23, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal. As such, city action is required on this proposal by September 21, 2004. P\Sec3\Maplewood Cancer Center Attachments: 1. Applicant's Parking Calculations 2. Location Map 3. Demolition Plan 4. Grading Plan 5. Site Plan 6. Utility Plan 7. Elevations 8. Landscape Plan Maplewood Cancer Center 5 August 18, 2004 rchitects p.a. St. Paul * Rochester Attachment 1 July 23, 2004 Re: U.S. Oncology Maplewood Cancer Center Additions and Remodeling Maplewood, Minnesota Parking requirements for retail and office (closest category for outpatient medical clinic) is one space for every 200 square feet of gross floor area. Existing Cancer Center - 13,948 SF Cancer Center Addition - 7,952 SF Total Proposed Cancer Center- 21,900 SF Parking Stalls Required - 21,900 SF / 200 SF = 110 stalls Existing Parking Stalls - 137 stalls Proposed Parking Stalls - 113 stalls shown We exceed the parking requirements by 3 stalls under our proposed parking scheme. One West Water Street, Suite 280 St. Paul, Minnesota 55107 Phone: 651.291.2701 Fax: 651.291.2710 www.jordanarchitectspa.corn Attachment 2 Beam Avenue '1 Markham Pond t' Maplewood Cancer Center 1580 Beam Avenue N Location Map Attachment 3 _l --U ! / ! / Demolition Plan 8 Att~,ch~ent 4 \ Grading Plan S 9 Attachment 5 I I ! I Site Plan Attachment 6 ! / / / / / Utility Plan 11 Attachment 7 N Elevations S Attachment 8 BEAM ,AVENUE N S Landscape Plan 13 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Planner Cottages at Legacy Village Hazelwood Street, south of County Road D August 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION Project Description Larry Aim, representing Southwind Builders, is proposing to build 33 for-sale townhomes on a 4.6- acre site on the east side of Hazelwood ,Street, south of County Road D. The project is between Hazelwood Street and the recently approved Hedtage Square part of the Legacy Village PUD. Refer to the applicant's statement and the maps on pages 19 through 30. The applicant is requesting that the city council approve the following: A comprehensive plan amendment. The current land use designation is BC (business commercial) and the city requires a residential land use designation for town houses. The applicant, therefore, is requesting a land use plan change from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential). A PUD (planned unit development) for the town house development. The existing zoning of the site is R-1 (single dwelling residential). The city may allow the town house development by approving a PUD for the proposed development. 3. A preliminary plat for the lot line configuration. 4. The site, building and landscape plans. (See the plans on pages 26 - 33). BACKGROUND July 14, 2003: The city council approved the Legacy Village PUD, including a comprehensive plan amendment, the tax-abatement plan and the preliminary plat. This plan included the site for the Hedtage Square townhomes, which are now under construction just east of this proposed development site. December 8, 2003: The city council approved the PUD, preliminary plat and design plans for Hedtage Square. DISCUSSION Land Use Plan Change To build the proposed town houses, Mr. Aim wants the city to change the land use plan for the site. This change would be from BC (business commercial) to R-3(H ) (residential high density). (See the existing land use map on page 24.) The city intends R-3(H) areas for a variety of housing including double dwellings, town houses or apartments of up to 16.3 units per gross acre. For BC (business commercial) areas, the city plans for offices, clinics, restaurants, day care centers and retail businesses. Land use plan changes do not require specific findings for approval. Any change, however, should be consistent with the city's land use goals and policies. There are several goals in the Comprehensive Plan that apply to this request. Specifically, the land use plan has eleven general land use goals. Of these, three apply to this proposal including: Provide for orderly development. Minimize conflicts between land uses. · Provide a wide vadety of housing types. The land use plan also has several general development and residential development policies that relate to this project. They include: · Transitions between distinctly diffedng types of land uses should not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. Include a vadety of housing types for all residents.., including apartments, town houses, manufactured homes, single-family housing, public-assisted housing, Iow- and moderate- income housing, and rental and owner-occupied housing. Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate buffedng and separation. The housing plan also has policies about housing diversity and quality that the city should consider with this development. They are: Promote a vadety of housing types, costs and ownership options throughout the city. These are to meet the life-cycle needs of all income levels, those with special needs and nontraditional households. The city will continue to provide dispersed locations for a diversity of housing styles, types and price ranges through its land use plan. Townhomes would certainly be compatible with the surrounding townhomes that the city recently approved and are now under construction east of this site in Legacy Village. The site is on a collector street (Hazelwood) and is between two arterial streets (Beam Avenue and County Road D) and, of course, is near shopping and other services. In addition, the character of this neighborhood has changed with the addition of Cardinal Pointe and Legacy Village to the area. Finally, this property would not be a great site for a commercial or retail business as it is hidden from the main commercial areas along White Bear and Beam Avenues. As proposed, the 33 units on the 4.6-acre site means there would be 7.2 units per gross acre. This project density is less than the maximum density standard (10.1 units per acre) in the comprehensive plan for town houses. For comparison, the Hedtage Square town houses to the east of this site will have 220 units on 19.8 acres (an average of 11.1 units per acre). In addition, the Cardinal Pointe Co-op across Hazelwood fram the site is a 108-unit, three-story building with underground parking on a 6.75-acre site (an average of 16 units per gross acre). The city's long-term stability of its tax base depends upon its ability to attract and keep residents of all ages. To do so, the city must insure that a diverse mix of housing styles is available in each stage of the life cycle to meet housing needs. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) Section 44-1093(b) of the city code says that it is the intent of the PUD code "to provide a means to allow flexibility by substantial deviations fram the provisions of this chapter, including uses, setbacks, height and other regulations. Deviations may be granted for planned unit developments previded that: Certain regulations contained in this chapter should not apply to the preposed development because of its unique nature. 2. The PUD would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or supedor quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the previsions of this chapter. 4. The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the preperty values, safety, health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land. 5. The deviations are required for reasonable and practicable physical development and are not required solely for financial reasons." The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) for the 33-unit housing development. They are requesting the CUP for the PUD because the existing R-1 (single-family residential) zoning requires the lots to be 75 feet wide, 10,000 square feet in area and to have frontage on public streets. As proposed, the individual town houses would be on lots 29 to 35 feet wide, would be about 1,919 to 2,299 square feet and would have access from pdvate driveways. With a small lot around each dwelling unit, a homeowners' association would own and maintain the rest of the land, including the private driveways and the common areas. In addition, having a PUD gives the city and developer a chance to be more flexible with site design and development details than the standard city requirements would normally allow. It is the contention of the applicant that the proposed code deviations meet the findings in the city code for approval of a PUD. City staff agrees with the applicant that the development as now preposed (shown on pages 26 - 30), with the proposed code deviations, would produce a development of equal or superior quality, that the proposals do not constitute a threat to the area and that the deviations are required for reasonable and practicable development of the site. Having private driveways with reduced townhouse setbacks will lessen the amount of impervious surface on the preperty. If the applicant followed all the city subdivision and zoning standards and built public streets, such a plan would require more grading and longer driveways because of the right-of-way requirements and the larger setbacks. In addition, it is important to note that the preposed code deviations do not 3 increase the number of lots or the density of the housing in the development over the density in other town house projects. For this proposal, the developer intends to sell each of the townhomes and expects that each unit will sell for at least $200,000. A homeowners' association would own and maintain the driveways, sidewalks, landscaping, the common areas and any retaining walls. For all the reasons as I stated above, there should be no problem with having a PUD to allow the new townhome complex in this location. The townhouses would replace the five single-family homes that were on the site. Visitor Parkin;i A major issue recently with the review of the townhome developments is that of parking. That is, will there be enough resident and visitor parldng within the proposed development?. The applicant noted in his statement (on pages 19 - 22) that the typical buyers of these homes do not need more than one extra parking space outside of the two that are in the attached garage. In this review, staff applied the same visitor-parking ratio that the city applied during the review of Legacy Village. This requirement is that the applicant provide one visitor parking space for each two units, or one-half space for each unit. Thus for the 33 proposed units, there should be at least 17 visitor parking spaces. The project plans show 40 exterior parking spaces in and near this development, including 11 spaces along the east side of Hazelwood Street, 8 spaces along the north side of Legacy Parkway and 21 spaces along the pdvate driveways within the development. Preliminary Plat The applicant is requesting approval of the subdivision to sell the individual townhome lots. This is typical of such developments and staff does not find any unusual concerns with doing so beyond the usual city requirements for platting. In this case, such requirements include the signing of a developer's agreement, the approval of final grading/drainage/erosion-control/utility plans, the dedication of required street right-of-way and the dedication of any drainage and utility easements that the city engineer may require. It is important to note that the city's contractor recently started constructing Legacy Parkway (with trails) from Kennard Street to Hazelwood, including the segment in the northern part of this site. In addition, the city is planning to reconstruct Hazelwood Street from Beam Avenue to County Road D in 2005. This construction will include the parking bays and sidewalk as shown on the project plans. Chris Cavett and Edn Laberee, of the city's engineering department, reviewed this proposal and had several comments. Refer to the memo on pages 35 - 36. Staff recommends that the city council require that the applicant meet all the conditions and statements in this memo as conditions of plat approval. 4 Land Purchases and Sales As part of a coordinated re-development effort, the City has been working with this developer to purchase the five existing residential properties that made up the project area. The city has been working with the developer and two of the previous property owners to help facilitate the construction of Legacy Parkway, for the reconstruction of Hazelwood Street in the area and in the preparation of this development site. Specifically, the developer bought the three southern properties (3004, 3016 and 3050 Hazelwood) and the city bought the northern two properties (3056 and 3062 Hazelwood). The city paid a total of $650,000 for the two properties it purchased. The city's approved tax abatement plan for the area will pay for the assessments, home demolition, site grading and the purchase of the two homes. In addition to the above, this coordinated effort has included the following: The City has purchased the two northernmost existing residential properties in the project area. The City will use about 0.13 acres of the area purchased as right-of-way for Legacy Parkway and the city will sell the remainder of this area (approximately 1.00 acres) to the developer at a purchase pdce of $150,000. City staff is recommending that the city make this purchase by Southwind Builders a condition of the approval of the development. Southwind Builders has purchased the three southernmost existing residential properties in the project area. The City will buy about 0.22 acres of land in this area from the developer for Legacy Parkway right-of-way. The City has agreed to buy this right-of-way for $50,000. As part of a redevelopment agreement, the City has already demolished three of the existing homes in the project area at City cost. The City also has contracted for the removal of the remaining two homes. City staff expects that the city crews will remove the remaining homes by the end of August. As part of a redevelopment agreement, the City has agreed to provide assistance for the site preparation and grading of the project area at a total value of $50,000. City staff anticipates that the city contractor will complete some of the site preparation and grading as part of a City construction contract. The specifics of this work still need to be coordinated with the developer. The developer has agreed to consider revisions to their site grading plan to allow for the disposal of up to 30,000 cubic yards of excess soils resulting from other City construction projects in the area. As a condition of the approval of the development, the developer must agree to work with the City to address this issue. Public Utilities Sanitary sewer and water are in Hazelwood Street and will the contractor will be installing them as part of the construction of Legacy Parkway. These systems will be available to serve the proposed development. As designed, the storm water from this development would go into the new, regional ponding area north of the site. The city designed and built the storm water pond north of the site to accommodate drainage from a large area east of Hazelwood Street. Drainage Concems As proposed, the utility plan shows most of the storm water from the site, including the pdvate driveways, discharging into the new ponding area to the north of the site. The city should require that the grading/drainage plan would not increase the storm-water flow onto any neighbor's land. (Please also see the comments from Erin Laberee starting on page 35.) Tree Removal/Replacement Maplewood's tree ordinance requires there be at least ten trees per gross acre on the site after grading or the developer would have to plant trees to replace those that the contractor would remove. For this 4.6-acre site, the applicant's plans show the entire site being graded and the removal of all the existing trees. The applicant's engineer told me that this amount of grading would be necessary for drainage purposes and to make this site fit the grades of Hazelwood Street, Legacy Parkway and the development to the east. As proposed on the preliminary landscaping plan (page 28), the developer would plant 110 trees on the site. These include ash, honeylocust, maples and spruce. As I noted above, the code requires there be at least 10 trees per acre on the site. For this 4.6-acre site, the code requires there be at least 46 trees on the property after the construction is complete. As such, the proposed landscaping plan would meet the requirements of the tree replacement code of the city. Design Review Site and Landscaping Considerations As stated above, there must be adequate visitor parking provided. The recommended conditions of approval should satisfy this need. The landscape plan shows the developer planting 110 trees, 51 ornamental trees and at least 125 shrubs in the developmenL While this plan is a good start, the developer needs to have several details in it revised to meet city code standards and current practices. Such changes should include increasing the tree size to 2 % inches (from 2 inches) and changing the Colorado Spruce to Black Hills Spruce or Austrian Pines (or a mix of these). In addition, the developer should coordinate the landscaping materials and designs along Legacy Parkway and Hazelwood Street to make sure that they are compatible with the approved landscape designs for Hedtage Square and Kennard Street. Architectural The three building designs (on pages 31 - 33) are attractive and the proposed color scheme would provide an appealing color variation. Li.qhtin~l Plan The landscape submitted by the applicant shows 20-foot-tall light poles at the intersections of the driveways and at the east end of the driveways (near buildings 5 and 15). The city code now requires the applicant to submit to the city a detail photometric plan for the site, including pole and fixture details and a plan showing the light spread and light intensity. City staff will need to approve such a plan before the city may issue a building permit for the project. Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District The applicant must obtain all necessary permits from the watershed distdct before starting construction. Building Official's Comments All applicable codes must be met. Police Department Comments Lieutenant David Kvam did not note any negative impact to public safety with the proposal. He did note, however, that since most of the driveways in the proposal are to be privately owned and managed that most of state statutes and many city ordinances governing traffic control or parking might not apply. He continued by stating that this could lead to issues later on. 7 RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the resolution on page 37. This resolution approves a change to the comprehensive land use plan from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential) for a 4.6- acre site for the Cottages at Legacy Village on Hazelwood Street. The city is approving this change because: 1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. 2. This change would eliminate an area that the city had once planned for commercial uses that is between two residential areas. 3. This change would allow for town house that would be more compatible and in character with the adjacent townhome development. 4. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for high-density residential use. This includes: a. It is on a collector street and is near artedal streets. b. Minimizing any adverse effects on surrounding properties because there would be no traffic from this development on existing residential streets. 5. It would be consistent with the proposed land use. B. Adopt the resolution on pages 38 - 40. This resolution approves the 33-unit Cottages at Legacy Village PUD (planned unit development) on Hazelwood Street. The city bases this approval on the findings required by code. (Refer to the resolution for the specific findings.) This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The development shall follow the plans date-stamped July 22, 2004, except where the city requires changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The applicant shall meet all the requirements noted in Edn Laberee's memo dated August 6, 2004. 5. The applicant shall sign a development agreement with the city before the city issues a grading permit. 6. The applicant shall provide a copy of the homeowner's association documents to staff for approval. 7. The developer or contractor shall construct the project according to the plans date- stamped July 22, 2004, except as specifically modified by these conditions. 8. The developer shall add sidewalks and sidewalk connections in locations that city staff decides are necessary. 9. The developer or builder will provide parking spaces at the ends of the driveways wherever they may fit. 10. The developer or builder shall install a six-foot-wide concrete sidewalk on the east side of Hazelwood Street for the entire length of the project. 11. The grades of the power line trail and all public sidewalks and trails shall meet ADA guidelines for slope. 12. Provide a revised landscape plan for city staff approval. This revised plan shall include: a. Increasing the tree size to 2 % inches (from 2 inches). b. Changing the Colorado Spruce to Black Hills Spruce or Austdan Pines (or a mix of these two species). The developer should coordinate the landscaping materials and designs along Legacy Parkway and Hazelwood Street to make sure that they are compatible with the approved landscape designs for Hedtage Square and Kennard Street. d. Overstory trees to be planted along both sides of Legacy Parkway and along Hazelwood Street shall be set at an average of 30- to 40-feet on center. 13. All setbacks are approved as shown on the plans date-stamped July 22, 2004. 14. Side yard building setbacks for all buildings that are less than required by the zoning code are specifically approved within this PUD as shown on the site plan date- stamped July 22, 2004. 15. The applicant or developer shall provide visitor-parking spaces at the minimum quantity of one-half space per townhome unit. This works out to a minimum of 17 required visitor parking. 16. An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access and maintenance. 17. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each housing unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit. C. Approve the preliminary plat for the Cottages of Legacy Village (date-stamped July 22, 2004). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat: 1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all retaining walls, site landscaping and meet all city requirements. b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in the development - primarily at the street and driveway intersections. The exact style and location shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. d. Provide all required and necessary easements (including all utility easements and ten- foot drainage and utility easements along the front and rear lot lines of each lot and five-foot drainage and utility easements along the side lot lines of each lot). e. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification, and no parking signs. f. Provide all required and necessary easements, including any off-site easements. g. Demolish or remove all buildings, fencing, scrap metal, debris and junk from the site. h. Cap and seal all wells on site; and remove septic systems or drainfields, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines. 2.* Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, trail, driveway, sidewalk and street plans. The plans shall meet all the conditions, requirements and changes listed in the memo from Edn LaBeree dated August 6, 2004, and shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code and shall be extremely detailed to the satisfaction of the city engineer. b. The grading plan shall show: (1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat. (2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (3) House pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large trees. (4) The proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer. (5) All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. On 10 slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a stabilization and planting plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with wood-fiber blanket, be seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the city approves the final plat. (6) Include the tree plan that: a. Shows where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. b. Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. Changes the proposed Colorado Blue Spruce trees on the planting plans with other species that are more native and compatible to the climate and conditions in Maplewood. (7) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than 4 feet require a building permit from the city. (8) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed district or by the city engineer. (9) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from the affected property owner(s). c. The street and utility plans shall show: The street or pdvate driveways with a width of 28 feet (with parking on one side), shall be a 9-ton design with a maximum street grade of eight percent and the maximum street grade within 75 feet of the intersection at two percent. (2) The streets and driveways with continuous concrete curb and gutter, except where the city engineer determines that concrete curbing is not necessary. (3) The repair of Hazelwood Street and Legacy Parkway (curb, street and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the new streets and driveways. (4) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). (5) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of-ways or within easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be outside the project area. (6) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities. (7) A detail of any ponds, the pond outlets and rainwater gardens. The contractor shall protect the outlets to prevent erosion. (8) Label Hazelwood Street and Legacy Parkway on all construction and project plans. 11 3. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage and ponding areas, install all retaining walls, install the landscaping and replacement trees, install all other necessary improvements and meet all city requirements. b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Provide for the repair of Hazelwood Street and Legacy Parkway (street, curb and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the new driveways. d. Meet all the requirements of the city engineer. 4. Record the following with the final plat: a. Any homeowners' association documents. b. ^ covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation, maintenance and replacement of the retaining walls. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for approval before recording. 5. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading. 6. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). 7. The applicant shall dedicate any easements and provide any wdtten agreements that the city engineer may require as part of this plat. 8. The applicant shall pay the city escrow for any documents, easements and agreements that the city engineer may require that may not be ready by the time of plat signing. 9. The applicant shall pay the city $150,000 for the property now owned by the city. Approve the project plans date-stamped July 22, 2004, for the Cottages at Legacy Village on Hazelwood Street. This approval is subject to the developer or contractor meeting all the following conditions: Obtaining city council approval of a comprehensive land use plan revision from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential) to build townhomes on the site. 2. Obtaining city council approval of a planned unit development for this project. 3. Obtaining city council approval of the preliminary plat for this project. 4. Complete the following before the city issues a building permit: ao Have the city engineer approve the final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, drainage, sidewalk, utility, driveway, parking lot and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with the city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. These shall include the normal water elevation and 100- year high water elevation. (b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow~ vegetation rather than using sod or grass. (e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city. (f) Show as little disturbance and tree removal as possible on the north, east and south sides of the site. (3) The tree plan shall: (a) Be approved by the city engineer before site grading or tree removal. (4) (5) (6) (7) b. Submit heads. c. Submit d. Submit (1) (b) Eo Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. (c) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (d) Be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans. The developer shall be responsible for getting any needed off-site grading or drainage easements and for recording all necessanj easements. All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter. The driveways shall meet the following standards: 24-foot width--no parking on either side and 28-foot width-parking on one side The developer or contractor shall post the driveways with no parking signs to meet the above-listed standards. The developer shall disturb as little as possible of the area along the north, east and south property lines and the applicant shall change the grading plan for this part of the site as recommended by the city engineer. an in-ground lawn-irrigation plan to staff showing the location of sprinkler a certificate of survey for all new construction. a revised landscape plan for city approval showing: As much of the existing vegetation (including the trees) remaining along the northern, easterly and southerly property lines as possible. (2) Foundation plantings near and around the buildings. (3) The in-ground lawn-irrigation system. (4) Larger tree sizes (2 % inch-caliper instead of 2 inch). (5) Replacing the Colorado Blue Spruce with Black Hills Spruce and Austrian Pines. Submit a revised site lighting plan for city approval. This plan shall show how the lighting on the buildings would add to the site lighting, and the plan should have additional lighting near the driveways, where they intersect the public street, so the driveways are adequately lit. This plan also shall show details about the proposed light fixtures to ensure they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and 14 bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent residential properties. Have the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) approve the proposed utility plans. A letter of credit or cash escrow for all required extedor improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. Staff shall determine the dollar amount of the escrow. The developer shall close on the purchase of the properties with the city before the city will issue a grading or a building permit for the project. The contractor or builder shall meet all of the requirements of the fire marshal and building official. J. The applicant shall obtain all required permits from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. K. The applicant shall submit an address and traffic signage plan for staff approval. 5. Complete the following before occupying the buildings: Install reflectodzed stop signs at each ddveway connection to Hazelwood Street and Legacy Parkway, a handicap-parking sign for each handicap- parking space and an address on each building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" and any traffic control signs within the site, as required by staff. b. Install and taper the concrete sidewalk along Hazelwood Street and Legacy Parkway to match the driveways. c. Install and maintain all required landscaping and an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas (code requirement). d. Install continuous concrete curb and gutter along all intedor driveways and around all open parking stalls. e. Install on-site lighting for secudty and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All extedor lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and the nearby homes and residential properties. f. Install the trails and sidewalks as shown on the approved plans and as required by the city engineer. g. The developer or contractor shall: 1. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. 2. Remove any debds or junk from the site. ]5 o 10. 11. 12. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project by that time. Any identification signs for the project must meet the requirements of the city sign ordinance. The city approves the setbacks as shown on the project plans. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The city will allow a temporary sales office until the time a model unit is available for use. Such a temporary building shall be subject to the requirements of the building official. No units facing Hazelwood Street shall have utility rooms or exposed utility meters on that elevation. The applicant shall work with staff to propose suitable screening for outside utility meters. 13. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required extedor improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spdng or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. CITIZENS' COMMENTS I surveyed the owners of the 10 properties within 500 feet of this site and received no replies. REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: 4.6 acres Existing Use: Vacant (formerly had five single-dwellings) SURROUNDING LAND USES North: County Road D and ponding area South: Saint John's Hospital East: Hedtage Square Town houses under construction in Legacy Village West: Hazelwood Street PLANNING Land Use Plan Designation: Existing - BC; Proposed - R3H Zoning: Existing - R-l; Proposed - PUD Findings for PUD Approval City code requires that, to approve a planned unit development, the city council must base approval on the specific findings. Refer to the findings for approval in the resolution on pages 38 - 40. APPLICATION DATE We received the complete applications and plans for these requests on July 22, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal. City council action is required on this proposal by September 20, 2004 unless the applicants agree to a time extension. ]7 p:sec 3\Cottages at Legacy (Swinds) -2004 Attachments: 1. Applicant's Statement 2. Location Map 3. Land Use Plan Map 4. Property Line/Zoning Map 5. Site Plan 6. Proposed Preliminary Plat 7. Proposed Landscaping Plan 8. Proposed Grading Plan 9. Proposed Utility Plan 10. Building Plans and Elevations 11. Building Plans and Elevations 12. Building Plans and Elevations 13. Sample Site Photograph 14. Memo from Erin Laberee dated August 6, 2004 15. Land Use Plan Change Resolution 16. Planned Unit Development Resolution 17. Plans date-stamped July 22, 2004 (separate attachment) 18. Preliminary date-stamped July 22, 2004 (separate attachment) 19. Colored Plan Booklet date-stamped July 22, 2004 (separate attachment) Attachment 1 Thursday, July 22, 2004 Ken Roberts - City Planner Maplewood Community Development 1830 East Co Rd B Maplewood MN 55109 Re: Cottages at Legacy Village Dear Ken, As I am sure you know typical suburban residential developments are most often characterized by single use subdivisions of single-family homes. Social space is oriented towards the back yards of residences, and garages punctuate the streetscape. Also, most developments lack any open space areas where neighbors can interact or children can play, and the streets are designed to move auto traffic at unsafe speeds, with little attention paid to the needs of bicycles and pedestrians so simple trips to the grocery store or local destinations must be made by car because streets are the only connection to these other areas. However, Southwinds idea/goal in our newest neighborhood is to provide a diversity of housing types, shade providing trees and a common green space placed within walking distance of all residents. Pedestrian pathways are incorporated into the site to promote walking and biking to local destinations. You will notice our plan shows the use of alley- served homes to hide unattractive garage door fronts and require traffic to proceed at slower speeds to keep our neighborhood safe. Parking is provided on these alleyways on one side only and prohibited overnight, similar to city parking ordinances. Also, short concrete driveways are used to increase green space and to insure that motor vehicles are garaged instead of left outside the homes. We have found the use of short drives holds down the initial cost of the homes by several thousand dollars and helps keep the association maintenance dramatically lower. (This is important as these will be private streets and the association will need to budget their upkeep into the monthly association dues payment.) Another goal in this prototype development will be to provide a detached single-family option for entry-level homebuyers, single professional individuals, empty nesters and others seeking the simplified maintenance and other benefits of a small-lot home in the $200,000.00 price range. Furthermore our typical buyer fits nicely in our 2-car garage design. Our research shows that they typically have one car and do not require large APPLICANT'S STATEMENT 5960 Highway 61 North, White Bear Township, MN 55110 & Phone: 651-773-8780 · Fax: 651-773-8265 · southwindbuilders.com 19 amounts of storage for boats or snowmobiles etc. Also, they do not entertain in the traditional sense and do not require more than one extra parking space outside of the 2 provided with the home. Another benefit to our design is on the Liberty and Victorian units another bedroom or studio fits neatly over a typical two-car garage. This can serve as a home office or simply another living area that can be used as the homeowner sees fit. This 33 unit development will be professionally managed and maintained to insure the individual property owners values remain high as possible and the community remains an asset to Maplewood. Grass cutting, landscape maintenance, snow plowing and removal, site irrigation, trash removal and an adequate reserve fund allotment will be covered by the $135.00 per month association fee. Finally, we believe that this 3 plus acre site in Maplewood would be greatly enhanced by the construction of these residential detached town homes. This will make this parcel most compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods, and provide another unique use of housing in your community. These homes will provide an alternative to the large multi family buildings to the east. The streetscape along Hazelwood Street will have the diversity of homes with front porches and attractive colors which will be pleasing to the eye. I have included for your review some pictures detailing our concept for home design and streetscape. I have also included a short narrative regarding the home features themselves. HOME NARRATIVE Southwind Builders will incorporate 3 different styles of homes in our Cottages at Legacy Village Neighborhood. All of these homes feature eat in kitchens, private courtyard off of the dining room, main floor laundry and ½ bath, 480 sq. ft. 2 car attached garages, comfortable living rooms looking out over green spaces. Two bedrooms with walk-in closets and a full bath occupy the upper levels. The traditional 1380 sq. ft. 2 stories will feature either a wrap around Country Style porch or a modest covered front entryway. (Victorian or Liberty respectively.) A 3~a bedroom or bonus room is also available over the garage and will add an additional 407sq. ft. The 1800 sq. ft. story and ½ (The Bungalow) shows a full front porch, an accent dormer and under the eve storage that expansion bungalows are famous for. On the exterior all homes will feature maintenance free trim around the windows and doors. The additional detail of frieze boards and trim banding all add to the houses and 20 contribute to an upgraded feeling of quality. In addition the unique gable trim feature and the decorative corbel's placed on all the front porches will enhance the Victorian look. Thank you for your consideration, Larry Alm, President Southwind Builders, Inc. ST. Proposed Street Standards Local ~t/al Street *9-foot travel lanes may be acceptable (see 2.2.1b}. One-Way Street * Clear for emergency vehicles. Residential Connector & Commercial Street *Sidewalk and tree grate for street fronting commercial. Rural Lanes * May be reduced to preserve mature trees. Residential Alley *Clear of obstruction for back up. CROIX VALLEY DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STUDY Industrial Street * Walk may be landscape.d until justified by ped. activity. Attachment 2 1-694 COUNTY ROAD D County View Golf Course BEAM AVE Hazelwood LEGACY VILLAGE m z z ..... ~.., Hazelwood Par LOCATION MAP 9 Attachment 3 COUNTY ROAD D 1480 LAND USE MAP 24 Attachment 4 1~5 ,~o/ .~. ~,~ ~r.~7 i-~599 ;~l~ 16511657 ~ 15671:3"~,,~ 1579i1587i~R~~ '~~ i i1613 16391645 1695 15551555 1567i~ [157~ 1~871 ~159~ 1~131613 ~7 157915~9 ~ 115991599 1~131613 16~71'6"~3 15551555 T i 1687 i159~159~ .161~ 1555 15671567 1~-~9~579~'~ ~ ..... 161~!6~$ 161~1 COUNTY ROAD D M1 R1 M1 PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP Attachment 5 PORCH PRO OSED; GARAGE TYPIC A,L..~.UILDINGS ~ ROPOSE~) ~ SITE PLAN 26 Attachment 6 P~_ANTING SCHEDULE Attachment 7 Attachment 8 PROPOSED LEGEND (BY OTHERS) PROPOSED LEGEND EX~STING LEGEND Attachment 9 OTHERS) PROPOSED LEGEND E~I~TING LEGEND ;I PROPOSED UTILITY PLAN ~o Attachment 10 II II II THE BAY ~ COTTAGES AT ~l~~ ,.;:,~ ;,~ I LEGACY VILLAGE II ~-- BUILDING PLANS 3'1 Attachment 11 II II I l II II au=: Maplcwood, Minn~ota. ~ BUILDING PLANS Reetde~ce for;, COTTAGES AT LEGACY VILLAGE MAPLEWOOD, 55109 32 Attachment 12 II II "' '"-" '+', '"'" '-" '"" ~'l, J ,..I ,'-' '4-' ~1.. I % ,'" , u ,~ ~ I o - I I c~ ...... .~..L-"_ _ £ ...................... _~_-.-_ ........ It-- BUILDING PLANS COTTAGES AT LEGACY VILLAGE MAPLEWOOD, 55109 ,,tt ~ch,.~=n u 13 S4 Attachment 14 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Cottages at Legacy Village PROJECT NO: 04-12 REVIEWED BY: Erin Laberee, Maplewood Engineering Department DATE: August 6, 2004 Southwind Builders is proposing to redevelop five existing single-family residential properties on the east side of Hazelwood Street into 33 detached town homes. Drainage from the site is proposed to discharge into a storm water pond just north of the site that was constructed in conjunction with Legacy Parkway and Heritage Square. The design engineers accounted for the drainage from this site in the design and in the construction of the new pond. The city's consultant, Kimley-Hom and Associates, has reviewed these plans and we have incorporated their comments into this review. The following issues shall be address by the developer and their engineer. Streets The proposed street width is shown m 28' back to back of curb. City standards allow for parking on one side of the street when the street is constructed 28' wide face to face of curb. If parking is intended for one side of the street, the street width shall be increased to 28' wide face to face of curb. 2. Pedestrian ramps shall be constructed at all sidewalk crossings. When the project engineer revises the plans, the revised plans should show the parking bays that the city will have constructed during the city's improvement project along Legacy, Parkway. 4. The developer and engineer shall coordinate proposed grades near Hazelwood Street with the city. Drainage Runoff from the north/south street in Block 1 is shown to drain across the street to an inlet constructed in conjunction with Legacy Parkway. It is recommended that the contractor construct an inlet behind the curb instead of allowing water to drain onto Legacy Parkway. 2. Construct STM MH #4 in the gutter line to pick up runofffrom the gutter. An 18" storm sewer pipe is proposed to connect into a stub downstream of CBMH/t6 at an invert of 909.93. The Legacy Parkway plans show a 12" storm sewer stub at an invert of 907.60. The engineer shall coordinate the proposed storm sewer downstream of CBMH #6 with the project engineer for Legacy Parkway. 35 Grading & Erosion Control 1. The developer must submit an erosion control plan to the city and to the watershed district for review and approval. The proposed contours do not seem to match the proposed Heritage Square contours. The project engineer shall coordinate the site grading with the Heritage Square plans and show contours that tie into their site. Utilities The sanitary manhole at station 1+35 on Legacy Parkway has a 901.96 invert elevation. The Southwind utility plan shows their sanitary sewer connecting into this manhole at an elevation of 903.09. An inside drop manhole will not be allowed at this location. The engineer shall coordinate the sanitary manhole invert elevations with the city's consultant engineer, Kimley-Hom and Associates. 1. The developer shall provide a tree survey and landscape plan. Developer's Agreement The developer shall enter into a Developer's Agreement with the City to address the conditions of approval, as well as the following: The developer has agreed to consider revisions to their site grading plan to allow for the disposal of up to 30,000 cubic yards of excess soils resulting from other City construction projects in the area. As a condition of the approval of the development, the developer must agree to work with the City to address this issue. As determined necessary by the city engineer, the developer shall dedicate public drainage and utility easements between Legacy Parkway and the north boundary of the proposed development for City storm drainage facilities. The developer shall also dedicate a public utility easement over all watermain facilities in accordance with Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) requirements. The easements shall be included on the plat or the developer must establish an escrow fund to ensure that the easements are dedicated. The developer shall dedicate any additional right-of-way along the Hazelwood frontage as required to accommodate the widening and sidewalk and reconstruction of Hazelwood Street. 36 Attachment 15 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Larry Aim, representing Southwind Builders, applied for a change to the City's land use plan from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential). WHEREAS, this change applies to the property located on the east side of Hazelwood Street, south of County Road D. The legal description is: Lots 1 through 36 inclusive, Block 6, Dorle Park, Ramsey County, and Lots 16 through 21 inclusive, Block 3, Dorle Park, Ramsey County, together with any vacated alleys and roads accruing thereto. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On August 16, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. The City staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Planning Commission gave everyone at the headng a chance to speak and present written statements. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the land use plan change. On September 13, 2004, the City Council discussed the land use plan change. They considered reports and recommendations from the Planning Commission and City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above described change because: 1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. 2. This change would eliminate an area that the city had once planned for commercial uses that is between two residential areas. 3. This change would allow for town house that would be more compatible and in character with the adjacent townhome development. 4. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for high-density residential use. This includes: a. It is on a collector street and is near artedal streets. b. Minimizing any adverse effects on surrounding properties because there would be no traffic from this development on existing residential streets. 5. It would be consistent with the proposed land use. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on ,2004. 37 Attachment 16 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Larry Aim, representing Southwind Builders, applied for a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for a 33-unit detached town house development. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the 4.6-acre site on the east side of Hazelwood Street lying south of County Road D. The legal description is: Lots I through 36 inclusive, Block 6, Dorle Park, Ramsay County, and Lots 16 through 21 inclusive, Block 3, Dorle Park, Ramsay County, together with any vacated alleys and roads accruing thereto. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On August 16, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. The city council held a public headng on September 13, 2004. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the headng a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described conditional use permit because: The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. o The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sawer systems, schools and parks. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 38 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The development shall follow the plans date-stamped July 22, 2004, except where the city requires changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The applicant shall meet all the requirements noted in the Assistant City Engineer's report dated August 6, 2004. 5. The applicant shall sign a development agreement with the city before the city issues a grading permit. 6. The applicant shall provide a copy of the homeowner's association documents to staff for approval. 7. The developer or contractor shall construct the project according to the plans date-stamped July 22, 2004, except as specifically modified by these conditions. 8. The developer shall add sidewalks and sidewalk connections in locations that city staff decides are necessary. 9. The developer or builder will provide parking spaces at the ends of the driveways wherever they may fit. 10. The developer or builder shall install a six-foot-wide concrete sidewalk on the east side of Hazelwood Street for the entire length of the project. 11. The grades of the power line trail and all public sidewalks will meet ADA guidelines for slope. 12. Provide a revised landscape plan for city staff approval. This revised plan shall include: a. Increasing the tree size to 2 ½ inches (from 2 inches). b. Changing the Colorado Spruce to Black Hills Spruce or Austrian Pines (or a mix of these two species). 39 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. The developer should coordinate the landscaping materials and designs along Legacy Parkway and Hazelwood Street to make sure that they are compatible with the approved landscape designs for Hedtage Square and Kennard Street. do Overstory trees to be planted along both sides of Legacy Parkway and Along Hazelwood Street shall be set at an average of 30- to 40-feet on center. All setbacks are approved as shown on the plans date-stamped July 22, 2004. Side yard building setbacks for all buildings that are less than required by the zoning code are specifically approved within this PUD as shown on the site plan date-stamped July 22, 2004. The applicant or developer shall provide visitor-parking spaces at the minimum quantity of one-half space per townhome unit. This works out to a minimum of 17 required visitor parking. An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access and maintenance. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each housing unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on September ,2004. 40 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ROSE LORSUNG, PLANNING INTERN MAPLEWOOD SIGN CODE STUDY, TIMELINE OVERVIEW 8/17/2004 Introduction: Signs are an integral component of a city's complex built environment and are needed to communicate information to both the public and private sectors. Sign codes are written to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to give guidelines to business for visibility and promotion. At the July 17 Community Design Review Board meeting, I presented a detailed summary report highlighting the City of Maplewood's sign code and a comparative analysis of six other cities. The purpose of Phase I was to familiarize the board with our current sign code as well as to illustrate the different approaches, through code writing and enforcement, that cities utilize when handling and following up on sign code matters. Phase II is now to involve the many businesses and residents that will be affected by the city's potential sign code revision. On August 20, an online survey found on the Web Clicks link (at the city website) will go live. For approximately one month, businesses, residents and concerned dtizens will be able to access the survey and easily and quickly give their thoughts and opinions regarding several sign code elements. Many of the technical details of the survey such as duplicity, user-anonymity, etc., will be worked out in order to have the most accurate quantitative data. At the August 24th meeting, Shann Finwall will present the flowchart-style timeline for the Sign Code Study and answer any further questions that you have concerning the Phase I report, proposed timeline and online survey. I apologize for not being able to attend the meeting and look forward to meeting on September 28 to discuss the results of the survey and the beginning of the proposed sign code changes. P:ord\ signcode_revision2004 Attachments: 1. Sign Code Study Timeline