Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/27/2005 AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, September 27,2005 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: a. August 23, 2005 Minutes b. September 14, 2005 Minutes 5. Unfinished Business: None Scheduled 6. Design Review: a. Maplewood Imports Auto Center Comprehensive Sign Plan - 2450 Maplewood Drive b. Legacy Shop pes (Legacy Village) - south side of County Road D, across from Slumberland and west of Ashley Furniture c. Kennard Professional Building (Legacy Village) - northeast corner of Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway 7. Visitor Presentations: 8. Board Presentations: 9. Staff Presentations: 10. Adjourn DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Longrie called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Board member John Hinzman Board member Matt Ledvina Chairperson Diana Longrie Vice chairperson Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Absent Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Olson requested additional discussion regarding Ashley Furniture to be added under Board Presentations. Board member Ledvina moved to approve the agenda. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for August 9, 2005. Board member Olson had a correction to the minutes on page 9, the first paragraph, fourth line, rephrasing the words You nood some to Best Buv has. Board member Ledvina moved approval of the minutes of August 9, 2005, as amended. Chairperson Longrie seconded. Ayes ---Ledvina, Longrie, Olson Abstention -Shankar The motion passed. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-23-2005 2 V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Best Buy - 1765 County Road D Ms. Finwall said on August 9, 2005, the CDRB reviewed plans for Tim Palmquist, representing Best Buy, for a new 45,243 square foot Best Buy store to be located at 1845 County Road D (Town Center shopping center). The proposal includes the demolition of the existing Frank's Nursery store within the center and relocation of Best Buy's current store into the new building. The CDRB approved the design review of the proposal, excluding approval of the elevations, which were tabled for revisions. The CDRB requested that the applicant revise the building elevations to add design features to help break up the large expanse of the walls and include the use of more quality building materials. Since the meeting, the architects, WCL Associates, Inc., have revised the elevations to address these concerns and are now proposing four revised elevations. The revised building elevations have been labeled in the staff report as 3. a., 3. b., 3. C., and 3. d. to help differentiate between the revised building elevation plans. City staff finds the elevation variations that include the parallel vertical EIFS bands 3. a. and the motif EIFS design labeled as 3. d. to be the most appealing. City staff recommended revisions to the elevations and were included in the staff report. Board member Shankar asked what percentage of the back elevation would be visible from the freeway? Ms. Finwall said the rear of the building is adjacent to the Slumberland parking lot which is an open expansive area but it would be best for the applicant to address that question. Board member Ledvina said the building elevations show the exterior lights on the building as being yellow in color and he asked what staff's opinion was regarding "yellow" lights being used? Ms. Finwall said the yellow colored light fixture blends in with the yellow on the Best Buy sign and goes along with the modern theme in her opinion. Chairperson Longrie asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Paul Anderson, AlA, WCL Associates, Inc., 1433 Utica Avenue South, Suite 162, Minneapolis, addressed the board. Mr. Anderson reviewed the building revisions with the board. Mr. Anderson said the yellow lights are a Best Buy trademark, which adds a little bit of sparkle to the building. The blue wedge on the building and the yellow Best Buy sign are also trademarks. Staff had mentioned the front door location in the staff report being shown in the incorrect location. He checked further with his group and was told the front door location is shown on the plans pretty close to where it will be placed, it may be off 1 foot or so, but it is represented pretty fairly on the plans. Board member Olson said on the current Best Buy building there are red angled light fixtures and the new building proposes to use small yellow lights that look like small boxes. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-23-2005 3 Mr. Anderson said the red lights on the existing Best Buy building shine up and downward on the building. The new yellow lights are a round curved light and the light fixture will shine up and down because the intent is to highlight the piers on the building. The light will also shine downward onto the sidewalk area. Board member Olson asked how much light would reach the sidewalk on County Road D? Mr. Anderson said none of the light would reach the sidewalk on County Road D. Board member Olson asked if there will be street lighting along County Road D in that location? Ms. Finwall said she wasn't sure. Board member Ledvina presumed there would be lighting in that area of County Road D. Board member Olson said currently there are no light poles in that area and whether or not it's planned for the upgrade or not, she wasn't sure. Board member Olson said she understood at the city council meeting last night that there would be a stop light installed at that intersection. Ms. Finwall asked if Board member Olson was concerned there would be adequate light at the sidewalk? Board member Olson said correct. Ms. Finwall said these issues can be addressed with the 2009 County Road D roadway improvement. She was not certain if there was street lighting presently at this location, however, normally there is at least 1 street light at every intersection particularly along County Road D. The Best Buy lighting plan doesn't show additional lighting along the sidewalk or trail. Board member Olson is concerned the uplights towards the top of the building would direct light upwards rather than downwards. Part of her thought process is for the dark sky theory that you aren't illuminating the sky and for safety reasons she would like more light to reach the ground for the safety of the pedestrians in and around the rear of the building. Mr. Tim Palmquist, Project Development Manager, Best Buy, 7601 Penn Avenue South, Richfield, addressed the board. Best Buy has switched the type of light fixtures in their new buildings and they are now using a design light fixture so they don't have to have a screen made for the light fixture. The light can be directed both up and down or up only or down only so that can easily be changed. Board member Olson asked how large the yellow light fixtures would be? Mr. Palmquist said the light fixtures are about 18 to 24 inches wide and then the light will project about half the width. Board member Shankar asked what the backside of the wedge is constructed of? Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-23-2005 4 Mr. Anderson said the backside of the wedge is usually painted the same blue that is used on the Best Buy sign. Board member Shankar asked if it was made of EIFS? Mr. Anderson said it is typically made of a metal panel or a rubber membrane that is painted blue. Board member Ledvina asked what the reason was for using two different materials in the blue EIFS and the blue metal panels and if it was possible for the wedge to be made of the metal panel? Mr. Palmquist said they left the wedge element as EIFS because that is what 95% of the entrance elements are. It could be made of metal and they have used metal panels in other Best Buy projects around the country. Board member Ledvina said the blue band that goes around the whole building is EIFS and maybe that is what ties things to the wedge. The staff report states on the north elevation that the loading dock wall should be constructed to match the building. He asked if that would be possible? Mr. Anderson said that's possible. Mr. Anderson displayed an updated building elevation where they created three piers across the loading dock wall to try to break up the wall with brick and EIFS. Board member Olson asked with staff's request for additional cornice details what would you propose to use on the Best Buy building? Mr. Palmquist said in preparing these building elevations they spoke to staff about that and he suggested the cornice details be very simple to keep things looking very modern. A cornice is more traditional to him and in order to keep things more modern he would recommend keeping it simple. Board member Olson complimented Best Buy for providing the board with additional building elevations to choose from. Board member Ledvina said he likes the changes that were made to the building elevations. He likes the blue metal panels, the banding, and in terms of which plan he prefers he prefers the horizontal elevation 3. a. In his opinion, building elevations 3. b. and 3. d. are too modern looking and he feels you would get tired of looking at the design. Chairperson Longrie said she showed several people the building elevations and both she and the others chose the very modern motif design of 3. d. The second choice was 3. a. Everyone thought the building elevations were innovative, modern and thought the building looked a bit like art deco. They liked the blue band and the blue color on the building which helped tie into the blue wedge. Board member Shankar said he sees the interest in the motif design of 3 d. but he thinks the building will become dated very soon. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-23-2005 5 Board member Shankar said he agreed with Board member Ledvina that his preference is 3. a. however, he is not in favor of the ribbed metal panel on the top of the building because that gives the building an industrial feel and appears to look like a warehouse. He believes with the horizontal EIFS that would conflict with it and he would suggest that the metal panel be flat with joints at 4-feet on center rather than the ribbed panel Best Buy has proposed. Board member Olson said she prefers building elevation 3. c. Her second choice is 3. a. She believes building 3. d. will become dated very fast, building 3. b. did nothing for her, and 3. a. was almost too horizontal. She liked building elevation 3. c. because it had a combination of horizontal and vertical elements on the building design. This will be a long building and she liked this combination of building materials. Board member Shankar said in his opinion buildings like building 3. c. are built all over the city in terms of metal precast panels and in his opinion that looks like a warehouse building and he wants to stay away from the appearance of a warehouse building. Board member Ledvina agreed with those comments. Board member Olson said she would recommend that the light fixtures shine downward to enhance the pedestrian safety around the building. She would like to see the top cap or cornice 12 inches in height and silver in color rather than a painted blue cornice. Chairperson Longrie said in looking at the building elevation 3. a. to put the silver cap along the top tends to accentuate the horizontal lines even more. She likes the idea of a silver cap for building 3. d. because it would tie in with the horizontal lines but she is afraid you would get too many horizontal lines with the building elevation 3. a. and it may be too much. Board member Shankar said if you introduce a silver top cap between the blocks of blue that would detract from the blocks of blue. In his opinion the whole thing should remain blue as shown on the design. Board member Ledvina agreed. He thought the lights should be lowered as they are shown on the front elevation but he would defer that decision to the architect to have the lights shine upward and downward. The point is to accentuate the piers of the building and he believes the lights are only accent lights, not utility lights. Chairperson Longrie and Board member Olson agreed. Board member Ledvina moved to approve the building elevations marked as 3. a. showinq the EIFS in the horizontal pattern. date-stamped August 16, 2005, for the Best Buy store to be located within the Town Center shopping center at 1845 County Road D. Approval is subject to the following revisions to the elevations prior to issuance of a building permit: (changes to the motion are underlined and deletions are stricken.) 1. Location of the fr-GFlt door must reflect the truo locatioFl of tho door as spoGifiod on tho sito plan. 2. Romoval of eMU material and replaGomont .....ith orick. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-23-2005 6 1.~. Brick piers added to the loading dock screening wall. a. Cornioo olemoAts on top of the Bl;JiIEling. 2. 4. All roof scuppers must be built into the brick piers and not be on the exterior of the elevation. 3. &.- Lowerino the veil ow Iioht fixtures on the west. north, and south elevation to be consistent with the east elevation. 4. e. Clear anodized metal profiled (vertical) panel to be substituted with a clear anodized metal flat panel with ioints no closer than 4-feet on center. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. VI. DESIGN REVIEW None. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS a. Board member Ledvina was the CDRB representative at the August 22, 2005, City Council Meeting The only CDRB item to discuss was Best Buy, 1845 County Road D, which passed by a 4 to 1 vote. b. Follow up discussion regarding the neon lighting at Ashley Furniture Board member Olson requested an update on the discussion that took place at the August 9, 2005, CDRB meeting regarding the blue neon lighting on the Ashley Furniture building. She asked if Ashley Furniture would be turning off the neon lighting during the hours the building was not open as she requested at the past meeting. Ms. Finwall said she expressed the concerns of the board to the Senior Planner, Tom Ekstrand who worked on the Ashley Furniture project. Mr. Ekstrand spoke with the representative for Ashley Furniture but she did not know the end result and will follow up with Mr. Ekstrand and bring further information back to the next board meeting regarding the blue neon lighting that the board had concerns about. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-23-2005 7 IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Sign Code Revisions Ms. Finwall said after several months of sign code revision input from the CDRB, staff presented the board with a revised draft sign code during the June 28, 2005, CDRB meeting. City staff requested that the CDRB review the draft code and submit individual comments regarding issues that still need to be addressed. The following sign code discussion took place: 1. Prohibited Signs: Signs attached or supported on a permanently parked vehicle or semi-trailers intended to advertise a business, product, or service. The board thought this could be a real challenge. The board thought the city may want to define the word "permanently". Staff will look into this and come up with clearer language. 2. Prohibited Signs: Signs that advertise a product or service not sold on the property except for billboards or other off-site signs where specifically permitted in this chapter. The board felt if the city didn't have this there would be a proliferation of signs which wouldn't be good for the community. 3. Wall Signs for Multi-Tenant Buildings: The board agreed the tenant should be allowed signage where their tenant space is and if they want additional signage on the end unit they could apply for a variance. That way the city would have some control over the design of the sign. 4. Sign Definition: (Should we consider including neon or other striping as part of the sign?) Board member Ledvina said that is an architectural element and should not be considered part of the sign. Other board members agreed with that decision. 5. Mixed.Use Zoning District - Projecting Signs: (Do we want to set a minimum sign height above the right-of-way/street?) The board decided they do not want to set a minimum sign height above the right of way/street because staff pointed out that the building department would check that according to the building code. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-23-2005 8 6. Sign Height: The board decided they don't want to consider allowing decorative caps on top of monument signs to be able to exceed the required height by 10 percent for a more decorative finish. Those decorative caps should be included in the maximum height of the monument sign. 7. Can the allowable sign allocation from one frontage be transferred to another frontage? The ordinance does not appear to clarify this. The board decided the sign allocation should not be transferred from one frontage to another footage. Staff will look into this further and make it clearer. 8. Garage Sale Signs: (Clarify the one foot from sidewalk or trail language so that it is clear that we are not talking about the space between the sidewalk and/or trail and the street pavement.) The board decided this should be consistent with the other requirements. 9. Off-Site Real Estate Signs: Board member Ledvina said he would support staff's recommendation for off-site real estate signs. The other board members had differing opinions. Staff will come up with some kind of compromise and further discussion will have to take place regarding this at a later date. Board member Olson recommended the city attorney review these sign code revisions before bringing the sign code revisions to the city council. Ms. Finwall said after conclusion of these items, staff will begin the next phase of the code revision which will include a public relations campaign to inform, educate, and gain feedback from the public on the proposed changes. A timeline of the sign code revisions will be put together and brought back in late September or some time in October. b. Reminder that because of the primary elections on Tuesday, September 13, 2005, the next CDRB meeting is Wednesday, September 14, 2005. Currently there are two CDRB items to review that evening. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:42 p.m. DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Longrie called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Board member John Hinzman Board member Matt Ledvina Chairperson Diana Longrie Vice chairperson Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Present Absent Present Present Absent Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary Kevin Christianson, Planning Intern III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chairperson Longrie recommended moving Staff Presentations ahead of the Design Review since the applicant wasn't present yet. Board member Hinzman moved to approve the agenda as amended. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Hinzman, Longrie, Olson The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for August 23, 2005. Chairperson Longrie and Board member Olson didn't have any changes to the August 23, 2005 minutes but tabled the approval of the minutes until the next CDRB meeting. Board member Hinzman was absent from the August 23, 2005, CDRB meeting therefore there were not enough board members to approve the minutes. The minutes were tabled until the next CDRB meeting. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 2 VI. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Ms. Finwall introduced the new planning intern, Kevin Christianson who is attending the University of Minnesota until the end of the year. Kevin will be assisting Ms. Finwall with finalizing the sign code. Ms. Finwall discussed the sign code revisions which included Off-Site Real Estate Signs and Wall Signs. The timeline is to have the sign code completed by December 13, 2005, for the board revisions or approval of the sign code. When the board is done the sign code can be presented to the city council. Chairperson Longrie recommended the board take a short recess in order for staff to contact the applicant for K and W RolI-Offs at 1055 Gervais Avenue, who had not arrived yet to represent his application. The recess was held from 6:23 - 6:31 p.m. VII. DESIGN REVIEW a. K and W RolI-Offs, 1055 Gervais Avenue Ms. Finwall said Kristopher and Wesley Scherping are requesting city approvals to make improvements to the property at 1055 Gervais Avenue for their business, K and W RolI-Offs. Specifically, they are proposing to add a gravel outdoor storage yard, build a 40-foot by 49-foot storage building and a new driveway on the property. They want to make these changes to the property so that they can relocate their roll-off (dumpster) business to the property. They also are proposing to surround the rear part of the property, around the storage yard, with an eight- foot-tall chain-link fence. The applicants are proposing to install screening slats in the fence to provide screening of the outdoor storage area. The planning commission recommended approval of the conditional use permits at their Tuesday, September 6, 2005, planning commission meeting. Staff recommends approval of the design, site plan and screening fence for the plans dated August 15, 2005, for K and W RolI-Offs outdoor storage facility and storage building. Board member Hinzman asked how long this property has been zoned M-1? Ms. Finwall said she was not sure but estimated it had been zoned M-1 since at least the 1980's. Board member Olson asked if staff could update the board on what happened at the planning commission for this proposal? Ms. Finwall said the planning commission recommended approval of the conditional use permits and perhaps the applicant could update the board on some of the issues that were discussed during the September 6, 2005, meeting. Chairperson Longrie asked the applicant to address the board. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 3 Mr. Kristopher Scherping, 1055 Gervais Avenue, addressed the board. Mr. Scherping apologized for his tardiness and said he thought he did not need to be present until the Monday, September 26, 2005, city council meeting. He said the only issue that came up at the planning commission meeting was with his neighbor Jerry that lives directly behind him regarding drainage issues and the potential for runoff and they worked those issues out during and after the planning commission meeting. Chairperson Longrie asked how many trucks K and W RolI-Offs would have? Mr. Scherping said they have two trucks and they have 14 dumpsters. Chairperson Longrie asked if the dumpsters would be used for construction debris or household garbage? Mr. Scherping said that question was brought up at the planning commission meeting and he stated the dumpsters would only hold construction debris and would be washed out at the landfill. The only time they would bring a full dumpster back to the site would be when the landfill was closed and then they would cover the debris with a tarp and it would be the first dumpster to go to the landfill in the morning. A lot of times when a dumpster is done being used it gets transported to the landfill and then it is delivered to another customer eliminating the need to come and go several times from their site. Board member Hinzman asked how many trips per day they would pick dumpsters up or bring dumpsters back to the site? Mr. Scherping said about twice a day. He said they also store a few dumpsters at the landfill. Board member Hinzman asked if they would ever store organic materials in the dumpsters? Mr. Scherping said no. Board member Olson said she noticed in one of the opposing letters that they stated the applicant purchased this property with the intention of relocating their business to this site. Is that true and did the applicant talk to the city about this before hand? Mr. Scherping said at the time he purchased the land he was thinking this would be a good time to think about operating his dumpster business from this site. He came to the city and talked with the City Planner Ken Roberts and the Engineering department about this many times to see if this was even plausible and the city staff said yes it is. It's going to be very convenient living here and working at the same location and being able to look out his window and see the supply of dumpsters that are on site. This simply makes for more of a convenient operation. Board member Olson asked where he currently keeps the dumpsters? Mr. Scherping said they have been renting space at Doherty's Auto Body and have stored some dumpsters at Ohlson's landscaping. They have been operating in Maplewood and would like to continue working and living in the community. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 4 Board member Olson said the site appears to be kind of tight in relation to getting equipment in and out of the area. She asked how he plans to expand or grow his business with this small site? Mr. Scherping said they basically work with contractors and homeowners who usually only have the dumpsters for a few days and then they go pick the dumpster up and dump it and deliver it to another site. To expand the business would be to add two more dumpsters or something. Board member Olson asked if Gervais Avenue is going to be able to handle the weight of these trucks and dumpsters going in and out of this site? Ms. Finwall said the city has road restrictions in the spring to make sure heavy trucks are not driving on certain roads. Mr. Scherping gave a photo of the proposed fencing product to staff to display on the screen as he described the fencing product he chose to use. Board member Olson asked if this storage facility was going to be a pole building? Mr. Scherping said this building will not be a pole building; it will be a storage building with a standard house foundation with a dirt floor. These are solid core filled Styrofoam panels that are pre-engineered. Board member Olson asked if he would be parking the trucks on the dirt floor in the storage building? Mr. Scherping said yes. Board member Olson said she thought the city had an ordinance that you must park vehicles on an approved surface? Ms. Finwall said the ordinance that Board member Olson was referring to is for residential districts and requires any vehicle parked in the front yard be parked on a pervious surface. This is a commercial zoning district and the CDRB can waive the requirement for commercial businesses. The board reviewed the photo of the fencing sample. Board member Hinzman said when he looks at a site he reviews the possible noise level and what could be done to help with the noise level. He thinks it's imperative to have a more substantial fence such as a wood fence to help with the sound of the dropping off and picking up dumpsters. This business is in close proximity to other residential homes and if there would be complaints from this area it would be from noise. The way to alleviate any noise complaints would be to have a substantial fence and he recommends a wood fence despite the applicant's choice of a slotted chain link fence. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 5 Mr. Scherping said he thought of using a wood fence and a plastic fence but for the rigidity and the security of the property he feels the eight foot high vertical slotted chain-link fence he chose is really the best choice. He has had theft problems before and he wants to ensure this is a secure area. He showed photos of a wood fence in the area and what a wood fence looks like over time. The photos show wood fences lean, sag, bow out and turn gray and old and there are maintenance issues to deal with unlike the vertical slotted fence he chose. Board member Hinzman said he thought the applicant said the trucks would be parked inside the storage facility. If that is the case there is nothing to be concerned about as far as security and possible theft since the only thing left outside would be the dumpsters. Mr. Scherping said he did say the trucks would be parked inside the storage facility however, the day the landfill is closed and he has to have a truck on site with a tarp covering the debris; people see the truck outside and are tempted by anything. Board member Hinzman said all fences have the ability to age and become dismembered over time so he is not sure that is an issue for him. In this case he feels a wood fence will buffer the noise better. Mr. Scherping said he checked into a wood fence. He would prefer "not" to use a wood fence. A wood fence comes in six foot sections and if you build it in eight foot sections the fence starts to bow and twist. The fence he proposes to use will be set in poured concrete with galvanized poles; it's a lot more rigid, can withstand the wind better and he prefers the maintenance free type of fence. He checked into both the white and hunter green vinyl fence as well as the wood fence. He did a lot of homework regarding which fence is best to use. It boiled down to the wind factor, security, appearance over time, maintenance, and noise barrier. He took all of those factors into account and he found this type of slotted chain link fence to be the best choice overall. Chairperson Longrie asked if the fence would be secured by a cement foundation? Mr. Scherping said correct. Board member Hinzman asked if there was any concern at the planning commission meeting with the crushed limestone and the possibility of runoff problems? Ms. Finwall said she only has the letter from the engineer to refer to which discusses the storm water runoff issues. There is a pond proposed on the northwest side of the site. The engineer felt allowing this type of surface for this kind of business makes sense. Putting in a bituminous surface for a company that moves dumpsters around would cause disrepair of the surface in a short amount of time. Board member Olson said she was concerned about the drainage on the site and the close proximity of the pond. Ms. Finwall said the City Engineer, Chuck Vermeersch, stated the city is going to require a maintenance agreement for the pond to ensure it is maintained and that any sediment in the pond gets cleaned out so staff feels comfortable with the pond and the drainage concerns. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 6 Board member Hinzman said it seems it would be easier to put a concrete floor in for the storage facility and it would be more durable for the trucks now rather than later after it's built. Mr. Scherping said there will be a four foot foundation under the building so the building will not shift around but at this time it makes sense to keep the flooring as dirt. Over time they plan on pouring a cement floor with radiant heat inside the building. Board member Olson asked if it was true the applicant was removing three white oak trees? Mr. Scherping said they are not removing any trees from the site, only adding trees. The plans dated August 15, 2005, accurately depict the trees that will be added. Board member Hinzman asked if the CDRB has the authority to set conditions under the conditional use permit? Ms. Finwall said no. Board member Hinzman said he was going to suggest some modifications to the operation of the business such as no washing of the roll-offs on site, no storage of organic materials within the dumpsters, and to make sure they are empty and clean on the site. Board member Hinzman said he offers the suggestions even though the CDRB doesn't have the authority to alter the conditional use permit. Board member Hinzman moved to approve the plans dated August 15, 2005, for K and W RolI- Offs outdoor storage facility and for a 1,960-square-foot storage building at 1055 Gervais Avenue. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the code. The property owner or applicant shall: (changes to the motion are underlined and deletions are stricken.) 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the city issues a building permit: a. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, sidewalk and driveway plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions and shall also meet all the conditions and changes noted in Chuck Vermeersch's memo dated August 26, 2005: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation and contour information for the site. (b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 7 (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as may be required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. The pond(s) shall have the required storm water capacity. Show details about the proposed fence including the materials, gate, height and color. (3) The tree plan shall: (d) (a) Be approved by the city engineer. (b) Include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site and shall show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. (c) Show the size, species and location of the replacement trees. The coniferous trees shall be at least eight feet tall and shall be a mix of Black Hills spruce and Austrian pine. (d) Be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans and shall show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (4) The design of the ponding area and the rainwater garden(s) shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responSible for getting any needed off-site utility, grading or drainage easements and for recording all necessary easements. b. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction and have the storage building staked by a registered land surveyor. c. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval which incorporates the following details: (1) All lawn areas shall be sodded. The city engineer shall determine the vegetation within the ponding area. (2) The addition of trees for screening along the north side of the site. (3) The developer shall install landscaping in the ponding area to break the appearance of the deep hole and to promote infiltration. Such landscaping shall be approved by the city engineer and shall be shown on the project landscape plans. (4) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. This shall include planting (instead of sodding) the disturbed areas around the ponding area with native grasses and native flowering plants. The native grasses and flowering plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance and shall extend at least four feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the pond. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 8 (4) (cont.) This is to reduce maintenance costs and to reduce the temptation of mowers to encroach into the gardens. Specifically, the developer shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate. (5) In addition to the above, the contractor shall sod all front, side and rear yard areas (except for mulched and edged planting beds and the area within the ponding area). (6) Adding at least six more evergreen trees (Slack Hills spruce or Austrian pines) along the north property line of the site. These trees are to be least eight feet tall, and the contractor shall plant these trees in staggered rows to provide screening for the houses to the north. (7) Shall be approved by the city engineer before site grading and shall be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans. d. Present to staff for approval colored building elevations or building material samples of the wall panels, standing seam roof, trim, doors, wainscot, and fence slats. These elevations should clearly show the colors and materials of the proposed storage shed. e. A revised site plan showing the driveway and a width of at least 20 feet that is paved between the street and the storage lot. Any gate along this driveway also must open to a 20-foot width. f. The requirement for underground irrigation is waived if the applicants sign an agreement with the City of Maplewood stating that the owners will hand-water all landscaping, and any required landscape material that dies will be replaced. g. If there is to be any additional outdoor lighting, a photometric plan showing that any freestanding lights would not exceed 25 feet in height, including the base, and the light illumination from any outdoor light would not exceed .4 foot candles at all property lines. h. If trash is to be stored outside of the house or the storage building, plans for a trash-dumpster enclosure is required. The enclosure must have gates that are 100 percent opaque, and the materials and colors of the enclosure shall be compatible with those of the metal building. i. A letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 3. Complete the following before occupying the new building or the site: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards and sod all turf areas. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 9 c. Complete all landscaping and tree planting and the rainwater garden(s) (if required). d. Install an in-ground sprinkler system for all lawn and landscape areas of the site unless the applicants: (1) Provide an alternate watering method acceptable to staff to keep the trees and plantings watered. (2) Sign an agreement with the City of Maplewood stating that they will hand-water all landscaping and trees and replace any required landscape material that dies. e. The eight-foot-tall choin link wood privacv fence must: (1) HO'ie 3 top roil ond have dark groon slots 3fOllnd tho ontiro storogo yord. ill ~ Receive a building permit from the city before installation. f. Install an eight-foot-high wood screening fence and additional trees along the north property line of the site where the vegetation does not adequately screen the new storage shed from the existing dwellings to the north. These additional materials are to ensure there is at least an eight-foot-tall, 100 poroont ol3oquo scroon wood fence on these sides of the site. The location, design and materials of the fence or the additional landscaping shall be subject to city staff approval. g. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure if there will be any outdoor storage of refuse. The enclosure must match the building in color and materials and shall have a closeable gate that is 100 percent opaque. h. The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. (2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. (3) Remove any debris or junk from the site. (4) Install all required exterior improvements including the parking and storage lot, installation of landscaping, installation of fence slats, installation of the ponding area, etc., before occupying the building. i. If the owners want to install any site-security lighting, they must do so as allowed by the city code. Any light sources, including the lens covering the bulb, shall be concealed or shielded so not to cause any nuisance to vehicle drivers or to adjacent property owners. j. The owners shall keep the buildings (including the existing house and garage) painted or stained and in good repair. Community Design Review Board Minutes 9-14-2005 10 4. 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 exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June 1 of the next year if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spring or summer. 5. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Hinzman, Longrie, Olson Chairperson Longrie offered a friendly amendment to approve the parking for the rol/-off containers based on the representations that there be no washing of the dumpsters on site and that the roll-off containers will not contain any organic debris. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on September 26, 2005. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. IX. BOARD PRESENTATIONS None. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:18 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: Richard Fursman, City Manager Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Comprehensive Sign Plan Maplewood Imports Auto Center 2450 Maplewood Drive September 21, 2005 INTRODUCTION Project Description Lejeune Investments, Inc. is proposing a comprehensive sign plan for the Maplewood Imports Auto Center. The plan will cover all freestanding and wall signs for four automotive dealers and an automotive service center which will be located at 2450 Maplewood Drive. Request The city's sign code requires that multi-tenant buildings with five or more tenants have a comprehensive sign plan approved by the community design review board (CORB). Maplewood Imports Auto Center will have four automotive dealerships and one automotive service center, as well as shared frontage and the need for sign easements. Lejeune Investments is requesting approval of the Maplewood Imports Auto Center's proposed comprehensive sign plan. BACKGROUND January 24,2005: The city council approved a land use plan change (from CO to M-1), a zoning map change (from CO to M-1), a conditional use permit for four automotive dealerships and automotive service center, and design review for the Maplewood Imports Auto Center. DISCUSSION The approved site plan calls for two automotive dealerships to be located along the frontage road of Maplewood Drive, two more dealers to be located in the center of the lot, and an automotive service center located at the rear of the lot. The applicants are proposing sign criteria for the first of the four automotive dealerships (Audi) at this time. Audi will be located along the frontage road. The sign criteria proposed for Audi includes two freestanding signs and five wall signs as follows: freestanding signs - one dealer sign (14 feet in height and 90 square feet in area), one pre- owned sign (no height given and 16 square feet in area); wall signs - one dealer nameplate, one dealer entry, two dealer logos, and one service nameplate (overall square footage for all wall signs equals approximately 110 square feet). The CORB should reference the board's recently adopted draft sign code when reviewing this proposal. The draft sign code, when approved by the city council, would allow one wall sign for each street upon which the property has frontage, plus one wall sign for each clearly differentiated department The size of the wall signs would be limited to 150 square feet, or 15 percent of the wall face, whichever is less. In addition, automobile dealerships could have one freestanding sign identifying the dealership, plus one freestanding sign advertising each car franchise. The maximum sign area and height would be 160 square feet in area and 25 feet in height. Freestanding signs shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with the building or project, with the base of the sign, including pylon sign poles, consisting of materials and colors compatible to the building or project. The area around the base of the sign shall also be landscaped. The proposed sign criteria fall relatively close to the proposed draft ordinance. Staff finds the signage proposed to be unobtrusive and in keeping with the architecture of the building. RECOMMENDATION Approve LeJeune Investmenfs comprehensive sign plan date stamped August 12, 2005, for the Maplewood Auto Center located at 2450 Maplewood Drive subject to the following conditions: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a sign permit for this project. 2. The sign criteria for each automotive dealership within the Maplewood Auto Center includes the allowance of one automotive dealership freestanding sign (maximum height of 14 feet), one pre-owned freestanding sign (maximum height of 14 feet), wall signage which does not exceed 150 square feet. All signs must be designed to be architecturally compatible with the building or project, with the base of freestanding signs, including pylon sign poles, consisting of materials and colors compatible to the building or project. The area around the base of all freestanding signs must be landscaped. 3. The sign criteria for the automotive service center within the Maplewood Auto Center include the allowance of wall signage which does not exceed 150 square feet. 4. The applicant must submit the following prior to issuance of a sign permit: a. A revised site plan showing the location of the four proposed freestanding signs along the frontage road and the four proposed freestanding signs within the interior of the site. The location must ensure that there is a distance of at least 150 feet between any of the four freestanding signs located along the frontage road. In addition, the location must ensure that the freestanding signs maintain at least a 1 O-foot setback to any property line. b. A survey showing the location of the eight proposed freestanding signs. The survey must reflect that the signs are located within a sign easement and must describe the legal description of each easement. c. An easement agreement for the installation and maintenance of all freestanding signs. These agreements must be recorded with the county. d. A revised freestanding sign elevation showing that the pre-owned Audi dealership sign does not exceed 14 feet in height. e. A landscape plan showing low maintenance shrubs and perennial plants around the base of each freestanding sign. 2 5. Each additional automotive dealership and/or automotive service center must comply with the above-mentioned sign criteria and must obtain community design review board approval for all new signs. After the board's initial approval, city staff may approve all future signs as long as they meet the approved criteria. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. p:com-devlsec9\Maplewood Imports Comprehensive Sign Plan Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Statement 3. Sign Elevations 3 Attachment 1 ----Y w~ 'l i=1' ""om ) ~ ,. ,~ ~ I D 1'l71 " , 'u--" / 1ft ~ f 1'1,1:; p ij 0 . I'n G .k..- \J ---':" ",rrr ~ .ru o. I .0 0 ~ 0 \\U C;; ''1- '" \) 6 ~ :)~ '-0 f~\J ~~ ' ..~ ~ \; ~. o ~ (5 0 ~ ~ ~~I)\~tn . (J , J (\ 0 :J --r-% ",n n.D D ..:7>::.::........... ldJ flo ~Cl ~ oJ", Q/ "<<< ..... ~ gaD CJ~ firJ % o rt .....:...:,....,: ...:.. ..... + --"---- \....:;:)D;: ~ . tJ,;-" a :.. ...., "__-' cC'T ~ ~ :~ II '.0....' ,,,,.,. " C' 1 1rJ" " L :... ....., ~ II~ D 0 ~~ .::.......:...:..::::...::.::. I-QAG (>~ :.. '. ...::. :..:. / ~ ci4~ I I ld' 0' I~ ~~ []I~~~ d~ P ~~h, ~ ~~ ~ [lIOI~~DmHh Ill/IF N W*E s Location Map Attachment 2 LeJeune Investment, Inc. intention for future signage at the Maple Imports Auto Center, 2450 Maplewood Drive. There are three issues preventing us from submitting the sign detail for future buildings on this site. One, each dealership has its own unique and brand specific sign requirements. They always require some type of visible pylon sign on the road-way, a pre-owned sign and signage on the building including their logo. From year to year, the specific sign requirements as well as the requirements for building design change. We will not know what the manufacturers sign requirements for a particular dealership are until we initiate the process to build it. Second, we have not yet decided which dealership will be built next or what position on the property the dealerships would occupy. These decisions will be based on many factors including the vitality of the automotive market place, product demand, future product and our need for growth. Third, the property as laid out shows four buildings for dealerships and an automotive support building. We currently own three dealerships and would like to acquire a fourth to occupy the final spot. With all these unknowns it is impossible to submit the sign detail requested. That said our corporate approach to signage has four bullet points. . Architecturally compatible . Compliant with the manufacturers and cities requirements . Proportionally suited to the facility to be functional but not overstated, . Construction materials of like nature to that of the facility. The detail for Maplewood Audi signs as well as the photographs attached, underscores the above outlined approach. I hope this meets your needs and provides the information necessary for the Board to approve our comprehensive sigh plan. AUG 1 2 2005 ------------------------ Applicant's Statement Attachment 3 Dealer Nameplate Entry Pylons Audi Clip Icon Tower Clip Service Nameplate !l-r 4",11318' '''' SIGN = 90 Sq.Ft. LOGO = 19 5o,FI. Sign Elevations Au},. GiA1/faf N~- {)WA~ s0~ -V EG-2 (Option) This appendage is available for all size flags. Various other messages are available. &I ".~ "'Can be wall mounte, if pylon and twin pol. Ffa~ Primary Identification Flag # 2 is 43" high x 55" wide Sign Elevations 16'.2' . ~ ,:\..~.>.,... "')",'_ ...... .... :.." '.. ':'. ......' '>.. .. ". .. "'. -,' """:'''''.'..",-. "",'.".r ".. ',' " __,_ .'-.;' "',0" ,_.... :..<.:'....... .....,..<-.....,.,... """, '-""" '..,""".......':"" IN' Audl 12B DNP - ' '". ".'-",,-,,,,,,,,,",,:,.,:,/.pif".<<;\:."" .... ./~,;,_,~_",.,t.~ 10'.10' AudltlADNP 3'.718' Audi #2 Clip 7'-7718' 3'-10' Audl U Clip 2'-4318' AuclI Entl'lnce Element 4'.'31" 3'.'518' 5116' Sign Elevations MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Design Review - Legacy Shoppes County Road D, East of Southlawn Drive September 12, 2005 INTRODUCTION Scott Schmitt, of the Hartford Group, is requesting approval of design plans for the Legacy Shoppes, an 18,912-square-foot retail center at Legacy Village. (The applicant's letter says 20,000 square feet, but the building foot print has since been revised to make the parking counts comply with the code.) The applicant is proposing to build Legacy Shoppes in two phases. If the first phase fills quickly, the applicant would follow rapidly with the second phase. The total building would accommodate seven to twelve tenants. The building would be constructed of stucco with a foundation of rock face block. There would be three colors of stucco in the color scheme. The colors would be a range of cream and brown tones. The rock-face concrete base would be reddish brown. There would only be customer entrances on the south side of the building. The north (County Road D side) and the end elevations would have no doors. Refer to the plans and the applicant's letter. Request The applicant is requesting community design review board (CDRB) approval of design plans and of their comprehensive sign plan for this complex. BACKGROUND On July 14, 2003, the city council approved the Legacy Village PUD concept plan. This plan had proposed a retail strip center in this location. DISCUSSION Building Design The proposed building is attractive. Staff feels, though, that to be in line, architecturally, with many of the surrounding buildings, the applicant should add brick to the building materials. Staff likes the design, but there is opportunity for brick in the materials selection. For comparison, staff looked at many of the surrounding buildings to see which have used brick in their exteriors. We found: Ashley Fumiture Maple Ridge Apartments Wyngate Townhomes Heritage Square Townhomes Heritage Square II Townhomes Slum berland Best Buy (recently approved) Retail shops west of Arby's 10. brick and EIFS (stucco-like material) lap siding with brick accents EIFS lap siding with brick and stone accents lap siding and shake accents decorative concrete block and EIFS rock-face concrete block, brick, EIFS and metal rock-face block base, EIFS and brick columns Staff recognizes that Wyngate was approved without any brick. The design of Wyngate had very attractive architectural design and was acceptable without brick. The stucco exterior seemed appropriate since Wyngate was a residential building and did not front on County Road D. The design of the proposed Legacy Shop pes is also very attractive. Staff feels, though, that the distinction here is that the Legacy Shoppes would front on a major street and, being a commercial building, should have decorative finishes that are compatible and on par with the more decorative buildings in the area. Staff, therefore, recommends that the applicant revise the plans to add brick into the building design. Without designing these changes ourselves, staff suggests that each elevation be approximately 30 percent brick as a guideline. The plans should also be revised to indicate what the side of the Phase I building would look like that would eventually abut Phase II. This temporary easterly end of the Phase I building would certainly be plainer in design than a finished building elevation. This had been shown on earlier drafts, but should be submitted again for clarity. There is no neon lighting shown on the plans. Any neon accent lighting, if proposed, must be shown on plans for the approval of the community design review board. Site Considerations Trash enclosure The applicant has proposed a trash enclosure in the southeast comer of the site. The design and materials would match the building, however, design details have not yet been provided. As a condition, the review board should require that the enclosure match the building in materials and colors and be large enough to contain trash and recycling containers. Also, there is one small gate proposed which does not appear functional for large containers or for trash pick-up needs. The final design should be subject to staff approval showing an appropriately-sized gate. Trash enclosure gates, furthermore, must be 100 percent opaque according to city code. Parkino The applicant is proposing 97 parking spaces. Code requires 95. The parking lot, stall and drive aisle dimensions all meet code. Liohtinc Plan City code requires that site-lighting not exceed .4-foot candles of light intensity at the lot lines. The anticipated foot-candle measurements shown on the photometric plan exceeds the .4 2 maximum on all sides of the parking lot. The lighting intensity proposed should be ''toned down" on the east and west sides of the parking lot to comply with the city code. The exception is along the private roadway on the south side of the parking lot. The four, double-light lighting standards proposed along Village Trail East are intended to provide street lighting as well as illumination for the southerly edge of the parking lot. Staff likes this concept and the lighting poles proposed would be attractive and the same as other street lights in Legacy Village. If we considered these lights as intended to light the site only, they would clearly exceed the .4 foot candle maximum allowed. But in this instance, they are also intended to provide street lights for Village Trail East. There are no light-intensity standards in the city code that addresses this type of street lighting. Staff checked with Jon Horn, of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc, one of the city's consultant engineers, to discuss this proposal. Mr. Horn was involved in the street-lighting design and layout for Legacy Village. Mr. Horn explained that there is an industry standard for a light intensity when designing street lights in a residential neighborhood. This standard, however, is very high and street lights are typically not installed at that high level of light intensity. The ones proposed are like the ones installed in Legacy Village along Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway. With that in mind, staff finds the street lights proposed to be acceptable. They cannot be considered simply site lighting, but are designed and placed to be street lights as well. They serve both purposes. Staff does recommend, however, that the bulbs in the street lights give off as little light as possible while yet being effective for street lighting needs. Landscapino The landscaping plan is generally attractive, but staff feels is somewhat short on trees. Only six trees are proposed on the north side of the building in a distance of 290 feet. Likewise, around the site, most of the plantings shown are shrubs. Staff recommends that the plan be revised to incorporate more trees in the landscaping plan. The east side is not as critical, but the presence of tree canopies on the south and west sides would be attractive for the Wyngate Townhouse and Heritage Square II Townhouse neighbors. Likewise, additional trees would enhance the streetscape along County Road D. PUD Landscaping/Screening Requirements Regarding the view from Wyngate and Heritage Square II, the PUD approval required that "adequate separation, buffering and screening must be provided for the multi-family residential units from the front doors, parking areas, loading areas and mechanical equipment of this commercial building." This requirement reinforces the need for substantial screening. The PUD also required that "overstory trees must be planted along the south side of the extension of Street B (the roadway on the south side of the site) at an average of 30 feet to 40 feet on center." With these requirements in mind, the applicant should revise the plan as noted above. Sidewalks The sidewalk on the south side of County Road D has recently been installed by the city. To make access available for pedestrians from this sidewalk, staff feels that the applicant should provide a sidewalk on both sides of the building to enable pedestrians to walk from County Road o to the sidewalk at the front of the building. As the area develops with numerous new 3 residential neighbors to the west, it would be very advantageous to provide safe pedestrian access to the future stores and restaurants in Legacy Shoppes. Deliveries/Drop Offs All deliveries would be via front doors into the tenant spaces. There are no rear or side doors for deliveries. I spoke with the building official about the potential need for rear doors for exiting purposes. He said it was possible that rear doors may be needed. In this event, staff would be concerned that the County Road D side of the building could be used for deliveries. Staff feels that deliveries via the public street should not be allowed. Store deliveries should be confined to the site and not impact the public roadway or the private drives to the east and west. Cross Easements The applicant should secure cross easements with the owners of the surrounding properties where there is shared access. Comprehensive Sign Plan The proposed sign plan looks as though it will provide uniform and regulated signage control within this complex. There are only tenant wall signs proposed. There would be no ground signs and the proposed sign plan does not show any identification signage for the complex, "Legacy Shoppes," only tenant signs. Tenant signs would be limited to 24 inches in height and must be at least 30 inches or more from an adjacent tenant space. The building elevations show tenant identification signs on the front, back and sides of the building. The written criteria, however, limits the signage to the front, customer entrance side, only. Staff does not object to tenant identification on the back facing County Road D if that is the applicant's choice. Signage for the comer tenants that could be on the front, back and side is excessive. Side elevation signs should not be allowed. Overall, staff feels that the proposed sign criteria are acceptable. Engineering Comments Chuck Vermeersch, an engineer with the city's engineering department, reviewed this proposal. Mr. Vermeersch found that there are no engineering concerns with the plans as submitted. Final plans will be subject to his review and approval. Building Official's Comments Dave Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, had the following comments: . A complete building code analysis will be required when plans are submitted for a building permit. . All new office buildings that are over 2000 square feet in area are required to be fire sprinklered and meet NFPA 13 requirements. 4 . The new building must be built to meet the 2000 IBC, Minnesota State Building Code and Minnesota State Energy Code requirements. . The center must have acceptable parking to comply with the Minnesota State Building Code 1341 for accessibility. The handicap-accessible parking spaces must be spread out for the all the tenants and one must be van-accessible for each building phase. . Mr. Fisher recommends a pre-construction meeting with the building department prior to plan submittal. Police Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett reviewed the proposal and stated that there were no significant public safety concems. He did recommend, however, that the applicant install the standard business security lighting and video surveillance systems. Regarding shrubbery, he cautioned that is should be placed in such a way that it does not provide concealment for burglars near any access points. Fire Marshal Butch Gervais, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, reviewed the proposal and stated the following: . There must be a 20-foot-wide emergency-access road provided. . A fire-protection system must be provided. . The door where the fire-protection system is located must be properly marked as such. . A fire department lock box shall be installed (see Mr. Gervais for the order form). There may be one box for the complex if all the keys will fit. The box must then be located in the center of the complex. RECOMMENDATION Approve the site/building design plans and the comprehensive sign plan date-stamped September 6, 2005, for proposed Legacy Shops retail center at Legacy Village. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall do the following: . Revise the building elevations for staff approval adding brick on all elevations to cover approximately 30 percent of each wall surface. . Provide an elevation design for the temporary side elevation of Phase I in the event that Phase /I is not built right away. This design shall be subject to staff approval. 5 . If any neon accent lighting is proposed, it shall be subject to the approval of the community design review board. . Plans for the trash enclosure shall be presented to staff for approval. The materials and colors of the enclosure shall match the building. The gate shall be 100 percent opaque and shall be large enough for removal of the trash containers. The enclosure shall be protected by steel/concrete bollards as required by code. The enclosure shall also be large enough to hold recycling containers. . A revised photometric plan shall be submitted for staff approval showing the reduction of light spillover not to exceed .4 foot candles on the east and west sides of the site. The street lights on the south side of the site shall be equipped with the lowest wattage bulb that yet provides adequate street lighting. This is to limit excess light spillover onto the Wyngate town homes site. . Provide a revised landscaping plan for staff approval that incorporates more trees on the County Road D side of the building and meets the guidelines of the approved PUD for Legacy Village. This would require overstory trees along the Village Trail East frontage placed at an average of 30 or 40 feet on center. The landscaping plan shall in general provide buffering and screening for the multi family developments to the west and south. Merely the use of overstory trees will not provide this. . Provide a roof-equipment screening plan showing how roof-mounted equipment will be screened from the residential views. The applicant shall comply with the city code in this respect. . Provide a revised site plan showing a five-foot-wide concrete sidewalk on the east and west sides of the building connecting the County Road D sidewalk to the sidewalk in front of the building. . Provide a screening plan for any exterior utility meters for staff approval. . Provide verification of recorded cross easements between this site and the surrounding properties where access is shared. . Provide cash escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of completing the site improvements. 3. Before getting a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: . Comply with or complete all aspects of these plans or any required revisions. . Provide roof-equipment screening as required by code. . Provide in-ground lawn irrigation as shown on the plans. . Comply with all requirements of the fire marshal, building official and police departments as noted in the staff report. 6 4. The compnehensive sign plan is approved as noted in the written criteria date-stamped August 2, 2005. The only exceptions are that tenant wall signs may be allowed on the County Road D side to identify tenants. These signs would be subject to the size limitation noted in the sign criteria for store-front signs. Signs are not allowed on the end elevations and no ground signs are allowed without review board approval. 5. Tenant deliveries must be within the site and not via County Road D or the side roads. 6. The community design review board shall review any major changes to these plans. Minor changes may be approved by staff. 7 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 2.04 acres Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USES North: County Road D and Slumberiand Furniture South: Wyngate Townhomes (under construction) East: Ashley Fumiture West: Heritage Square Second Addition Townhomes PLANNING Land Use Plan: BC (business commercial) Zoning: PUD (planned unit development) PAST ACTIONS July 14, 2003: The city council approved the Legacy Village PUD. September 8, 2003: The city council approved the final plat for Legacy Village. November 24, 2003: The city council approved a revision to the Legacy Village final plat. November 25, 2003: The CDRB approved Ashley Furniture. December 16,2003: The CDRB approved the Heritage Square Town Homes. February 9, 2004: The city council approved the final plat for Heritage Square. July 26,2004: The city council approved Heritage Square Town Homes Second Addition. October 26, 2004: The CDRB approved the plans for the Wyngate rental townhomes. APPLICATION DATE We received the complete application and plans for this proposal on August 19, 2005. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications. A decision on this request is required by October 18, 2005. p:sec3\Legacy Shops Design 9'05 Attachments 1. Applicanfs letter dated July 29, 2005 2, Location Map 3. Legacy Village PUD Concept Plan 4. S~e/Landscaping Plan 5, Comprehensive Sign Plan Criteria 6. Colored Elevation (separate attachment) 7. Plans date-stamped September 6,2005 (separate attachment) 8 Attachment 1 ~ HARTFORD GROUP, INC. Real Estate Development. Architecture. Engineering. Management July 29, 2005 Tom Ekstrand City of Maplewood 1830 Cty Rd BEast Maplewood MN 55109 Tom: We appreciate the time you have spent with us in planning the Legacy Project in Maplewood and we are pleased to submit our retail phase of the development to the Community Design Review Board. The proposed development is located immediately adjacent and to the west of AsWey Furniture. It will be a 20,000 square foot, multi-tenant, retail building. At this point, we are planning tD develDp this building in two 10,000 square foot phases however; if leasing continues to move along quickly we may build the second phase at the same time. The 20,000 square foot building is intended to accommodate 7 to 12 retail/service tenants ranging in size from 1,200 square feet to 5,000 square feet. The tenant mix could include tenants such as a sandwich shop, dry- cleaning pick up, tanning salon, hair care, insurance agents, dentists, financial planners, ice cream shop or other similar smaller retail tenants. I look forward to working with you in a effort to move this project fO;r\Vard. Enclosed are the packets and the fees for the Community Design Review Board. To accopunodate some of our tenants we would like to request being on the agenda for the August 22, 2005 meeting. Please inform us as to the amount of escrow needed for the engineering fees and we will remit a check to you. Please contact me with any questions at 952-746-1279. Thank you for your assistance. ~ Scott Schmitt, CCIM Director of Retail Development 9 HARTFORD GROUP INC.. 12100 Singletree Lane, Suite 100. Eden Prairie, MN 55344-7933 (952) 746-1200. Telephone www.hartfordgrp.com (952) 746-1201 . Fax Attachment 2 1-694 PROPOSED LEGACY SHOPS SITE .. !ir-----:---_______ I / I ;:P ill I I ~ H-i ~____ I i:tj EB' q=j ~pJil EB fB,+<I-H[J '-'-' g ,-"-' , , 1m! , LLJ ' i EE i , I lEE! >-----; -- ------- . --e---c _~~.:::::::-;::;.::_:.::::======= ,1-___ ~ ~ I -?-/ -. , 1.7' " I .9 . ~ ,f' /l!'~'", 1'// I ~~\ ,f \\ \ /1 'I iiJ" II, I " III '#- II' ! I ",'" ,,' I II, ,! ".1 ! I !Ii I Iffl 1"1 II ! ii I r-:p>----j 1 i ! I' I I q Ii 1----. 'I I -..:;::=~~-~-_. i i 1;[---- I 1 ' '! i 'I I 'I, I, I~~!l , I .! 1-1 Ii bl Iii, PI ,I !Z! Si toJi i<CI !:c', r I I I ! ! I ' IS~JQf;, ,I j i - 'I'!..s..sk-'ItQ I , --_ I 1 ---1 I , , " 'I I ! , ! _~J l HERITAGE SQUARE TOWNHOMES Ii "'--I" r II III i Ii l ii I ASHLEY I ii i HERITAGE SQUARE FURNITURE I" 2ND ADDITION \. \\, iWVNGA TE II II \~\ I RENTAL , II \ I'TOWNHOMES \\\', , i'l '1;\\\ 'i Ii 11\\1, L II Ii "'I ........:::-__====1 'j \\ I, ,.,-:;;~---. i LEGACY VILLAGE,;~:;::'/ \, I I, -j ~; .,,, .....-:'..::?I./' '\ 1 LEGACY PARKWAY =L-\b,~,==,=,~.-/ \ / . ",,!i r i ! .~' I, ,,'" I J:;} i ", i ").; I "I ,) ,I I, '" 11111, (r--/ SCULPTURE I' I ~ Q~~---C 1 ii I I PARK I -il 0/ 'ii l!:Cj ~/ Iii I '~I wi u ---.-J ~ ...J I Ii Iz! ~I I I ElI11 :< I Ii I! '--_- Ii 1 I i r " ft II I- ii 1/-- i III """'-". I d r ,"111\ , I~ r i'l I III ~Ir ~I {\,I ~/)l\?t, L_, 'II iU I 'ii ' " ' BEAM AVE!! , // I I~ II , I I i I I HazelWDDd'1 ( ~- I, I LOCATION MAP 1U Attachment 3 rl:;;<l~~ ~ .:w... ~L' ~:____t._ )\ ......:..~- .....:::.~~.. LEGACY VILLAGE AT MAPLEWOOD ~~S.d -l-6::-~'::"-':;- ,'_m...~ ____ -- ----, - =~~ rr---- \; , II : Ir Ij I ~ '- OUTLOT H ......... -... GROR 1L7I1& ..~......,._-- IL.. ,..... i_'; ti J-.---- ! ~. ,...... ~'" -_....~.... ...._:_~ : ;'C~,",fD"! ,.-::,:=." ""-:'" ,'-=!'5':,.IUtli -...-, " . APPROVED PUD DEVELOPMENT-CONCEPT PLAN JULY 14, 2003 11 I Ii lin i IIW.' .!I If I ... I illlll. 'I -- , 'I 1:1 I I' I I I'l I II , I' (]!E) i oi -~* hI I I I , I I I . * Ih ClIlIiiO L il ~iI --- --- ..-- --- 12 -, I I , I I I I I I I I I Attachment 4 II I I, ,5 ;1 I ~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I i! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ). , I I I I -. a / I I - A' 1 c__________ ~ I ' ..--...--..---------------0.-. u;nwo """'.... ~J !i! != ~! i!!~ ~.. o z ~'I i.l" m;'Ulii ~ ~ Comprehensive Sign Plan RECEIVED AUG 0 2 2005 Attachment 5 Legacy Shops at Maplewood does not intend to construct a monument sign on the site. Each tenant within the proposed shopping center shall be allowed signage according to the following criteria: Signage on the exterior of the premises shall be provided as herein specified and Tenant shall not erect or maintain nor allow to remain, any sign on the exterior of the Premises except as permitted herein: Each Tenant shall design, furnish and install one illuminated storefront sign. Tenant shall, prior to commencement of the term, erect the lighted sign (the "Store Front Sign") on the front of the Premises in the designated sign band. At Tenants option, Tenant shall also be allowed to construct one sign to be placed on the north side of the building. The Store Front Sign and any sign placed on the north side of the building shall be individual letters, internally illuminated and mounted on a raceway or mounted directly on the facade. All returns and trim caps shall be Dark Bronze anodized aluminum finish or to match storefront window mullion. Sign faces are to be Plexiglas, and of a color approved in advance by Landlord. Raceways shall be painted to match the sign band. Tenant shall submit three sets of drawings and specifications to Landlord for approval and/or comments along with samples of material and colors for all of Tenant's proposed sign work. The drawings shall clearly show the location, graphics, color and construction and attachment details for Tenant's signs. The signs shall be subject to Landlord's approval and the following criteria: I. The wording of the signs shall be limited to Tenant's Trade Name only. 2. Single Line Signage: Maximum allowable height shall be twenty-four inches (24") and the minimum height shall be twelve inches (12"). 3. Double Line Signage: Two lines of 12" copy is permitted. 3. The length of the illuminated sign is limited to 80% of the width of the Premises and shall be centered horizontally. The sign shall be no closer than 30" to the adjacent tenant. 4. The illuminated sign shall be of individual internally illuminated letters and connected to building's electric service with an automatic timer. The internal lamps shall be contained and concealed wholly within the depth structure of the letters. 5. All letters shall have concealed attachment devices, clips, wmng and transformers. No exposed raceways, ballast boxes or electrical transformers will be permitted except as required by code. All sign transformers, ballasts, electrical boxes, and other equipment shall not be exposed. All signs will be centered vertically and horizontally on the sign band in relationship to the store demising walls. 6. All signs shall be fabricated and installed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. 7. The following are prohibited, a. Paper signs and/or stickers utilized as signs. 13 b. Signs of a temporary character or purpose, irrespective of the composition of the sign or material used. No signs or banners shall be painted on the exterior of the masonry doors, windows or any other surface on the Premises, nor erected on the roof of the Premises without Landlord's consent. c. Printed signs, except, however, one non-illuminated, small scale - signature sign' which is lettered on the glass portion of a store front of Tenant and/or affixed to such store front surface, provided, such sign does not exceed three (3) inches in height nor project more than one inch. d. Freestanding or mobile signs. e. Moving signs. f. Signs with luminous letters. g. Box type signs or signs with formed plastic letters. h. No exposed neon or incandescent bulbs or flashing, blinking, rotating, flickering or moving signs, markers, or illumination will be permitted. No floodlights. 1. The name and/or stamp of the sign contractor exposed to view. J. NO signs of any kind shall be erected until written specifications and drawings of such signs arc first approved in writing by Landlord. Such specifications and drawings shall be submitted to Landlord in duplicate and shall show the size, construction, and materials, colors, script, name of sign manufacturer and proposed location of such sign in conformity. 8. Any signs erected by Tenant pursuant to the provisions hereof shall be erected at Tenant's own risk and expense, shall be in accordance with applicable law, and shall concern only the business of Tenant. Tenant shall maintain said signs in a good state of repair and save the Landlord harmless from any loss, cost or damage as a result of the erection, maintenance, existence or removal of the same. Tenant shall repair any damage caused by the erection, existence, maintenance or removal of all such signs. All electrical signs shall be approved by Underwriter's Laboratory (UL) or equivalent state recognized institution. All signs must conform to all local codes (including city, county. and state). Failure to adhere to any of the specifications is grounds for removal of all signs at the Tenant's expense. Reinstallation of signs is strictly prohibited without written approval from Landlord. 14 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Design Review/Sign Plan Review - Kennard Professional Building Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway September 19, 2005 INTRODUCTION Alex Young, of MSP Commercial, is requesting approval of design plans for the Kennard Professional Building, a 45,732-square-foot, two-story medical-office building. The proposed building would be located in Legacy Village at the northeast comer of the Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway roundabout. Refer to the attachments. The proposed building would have an exterior primarily of brick with Dryvit or EIFS (Exterior Insulation Finish System-a stucco-type product) as an accent at the top and rock-face concrete block at the base of the building. All sides of the building would be treated the same with the same finishes all around. Refer to the plans and the attached building-materials list. Request The applicant is requesting that the community design review board (CDRB) approve building/site design plans and signage plans. Refer to the applicant's description of the proposed signage (attached). BACKGROUND July 14, 2003: The city council approved the Legacy Village PUD concept plan. The proposed site was then referred to as the .corporate/commercial site." The proposed building is the type of development on this site that was originally anticipated. September 12, 2005: Staff approved a lot split creating this site. Prior to this lot split, the original property included the abutting lot to the east. DISCUSSION Building Design The proposed building design is attractive in design and materials. Site Considerations Trash enclosure There is no outdoor trash storage shown on the site. If there is to be outdoor trash storage, the applicant must revise the plans showing the location and design of an enclosure. The design must be compatible with the building in colors and materials. ParkinQ The applicant is proposing 234 parking spaces. Code requires 220. The only problem staff finds is that the parking stalls are shown to be 9 feet wide. The code requires 9 Y:z feet for office parking. It appears that there is room on site to increase the stall widths to 9 Y:z feet. The 14 extra spaces will help in this regard. LiohtinQ Plan The photometric plan shows the light-intensity levels to be in compliance with city code. The "shoe-box style" pole lights proposed should prevent any glare from the bulbs from being visible to neighbors. Landscapino and Screenino The landscaping proposed would be attractive. The applicant has proposed a substantial number of shrubs because of the reduced setbacks required. There is not much space remaining on the street sides of the building to plant trees. Staff does feel, though, that the applicant should add trees to provide parking lot screening along the west side of the parking lot across from the town homes. There are only five trees proposed so far. This area could sustain many more trees to soften the parking lot view from the town homes to the west. There is also a need for screening on the north side of the parking lot. There may be an issue here, however, with Xcel Energy and British Petroleum. Xcel may prohibit the planting of trees under their power lines as may British Petroleum (BP) with their buried pipeline along the north line of the site. The applicant is supportive of screening, but perhaps a screening fence would be a better option due to the utility easements in place on this site. BP had refused to allow Ashley Furniture to plant shrubs in their petroleum-pipeline easement. SidewalklTrail Connections The applicant has provided a sidewalk connection to the Kennard Street sidewalk. According to the city council's PUD approval, there must also be a sidewalk connection to the Legacy Village sidewalk. The applicant should add this sidewalk connection. Cross Easements The applicant should provide verification that they have cross easements with the owner of the abutting property to the east. Comprehensive Sign Plan The applicant is proposing three exterior signs. These would be two monument signs as shown on the site plan. One would be near their entrance along Kennard Street and the other facing the roundabout at the southwest comer of the building. These signs would both have rock-face block bases and areas for tenant identification. The third sign would be a wall-mounted sign that identifies the building on the angled wall surface facing the roundabout. Refer to the applicant's letter. 2 Engineering Comments Refer to the attached report from Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer. Police Department Comments Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett, of the Maplewood Police Department, reviewed the plans and found no significant concems. He did recommend, though, that there be the standard commercial building alarm and surveillance equipment installed. Building Official's Comments Dave Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, had the following comments: . A complete building code analysis will be required when plans are submitted for a building permit. . The building is required to be fire sprinklered and must meet NFPA 13. . Separate male and female restrooms will be required on each floor. . An elevator lobby may be required. . Enclosed stairs may be required. . The building must be built to meet the 2000 IBC Code, the Minnesota State Building Code and the Minnesota State Energy Code. . The building official recommends a pre-construction meeting with the building department. RECOMMENDATION Approve the site/building design plans and the comprehensive sign plan date-stamped September 1, 2005, for proposed Kennard Professional Building at Legacy Village. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall do the following: . If any neon accent lighting is proposed, it shall be subject to the approval of the community design review board. . Plans for a trash enclosure (if used) shall be presented to staff for approval. The materials and colors of the enclosure shall match the building. The gate shall be 100 percent opaque and shall be large enough for removal of the trash containers. The enclosure shall be protected by steel/concrete bollards as 3 required by code. The enclosure shall also be large enough to hold recycling containers. . Provide a revised landscaping plan for staff approval that adds 10, six-foot-tall (minimum) evergreen trees on the Kennard Street side of the parking lot. The applicant shall also provide a decorative screening fence along the north side of the parking lot as a buffer for the town homes. The screening fence must be at least six feet tall and made of cedar or no-maintenance plastic. This fence may be omitted if British Petroleum prohibits a fence within their easement. . Provide a roof-equipment screening plan showing how roof-mounted equipment will be screened from the residential views if any equipment would be visible to neighboring townhome residents. . Provide a revised site plan showing a five-foot-wide concrete sidewalk from the east side of the building to the Legacy Parkway sidewalk. . Provide a screening plan for any exterior utility meters that may be visible for staff approval. . Provide verification of recorded cross easements between this site and the abutting site to the east. . Provide cash escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of completing the site improvements. . Comply with all requirements of the city's engineering department and those noted in the report by Erin Laberee dated September 19,2005. . Provide a revised plan showing fencing on top of any retaining walls that would exceed four feet in height. Retaining walls that exceed four feet in height must also be designed by an engineer and have a building permit. 3. Before getting a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: . Comply with or complete all aspects of these plans or any required revisions. . Provide roof-equipment screening as required by code. . Provide in-ground lawn irrigation for all sodded areas and all planting beds. . Comply with all requirements of the fire marshal, building official and police department staff. 4. The comprehensive sign plan is approved as noted in the applicant's letter dated September 13, 2005. Staff may approve changes to this sign plan as long as they comply with city code requirements. 5. The community design review board shall review any major changes to these plans. Minor changes may be approved by staff. 4 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 3.25cres Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Heritage Square 2nd Addition Townhomes South: Legacy Parkway and a future seniors-apartment site East: Future office site West: Kennard Street and Heritage Square Townhomes PLANNING Land Use Plan: Be (business commercial) Zoning: PUD (planned unit development) PAST ACTIONS July 14, 2003: The city council approved the Legacy Village PUD. September 8, 2003: The city council approved the final plat for Legacy Village. November 24, 2003: The city council approved a revision to the Legacy Village final plat. November 25, 2003: The eDRB approved Ashley Furniture. December 16,2003: The eDRB approved the Heritage Square Town Homes. February 9,2004: The city council approved the final plat for Heritage Square. July 26,2004: The city council approved Heritage Square Town Homes Second Addition. October 26, 2004: The eDRB approved the plans for the Wyngate rental townhomes. APPLICATION DATE We received the complete application and plans for this proposal on September 1, 2005. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications. A decision on this request is required by October 31, 2005. p:sec3\Keller Professional Building 9'05 Attachments 1. Applicanfs letter dated August 30, 2005 2. Location Map 3, Stte/Landscaping Plan 4. Comprehensive Sign Plan Criteria 5. Building Elevation Reduction 6. Proposed Exterior Building Materials List 7. Report from Erin Laberee dated September 19, 2005 8. Plans date-stamped September 1, 2005 (separate atiachment) 5 Attachment 1 - I \ S P , f ,j,'l{'.III,;( 1'\1 350 ST. PErER STREET. SUITE 200. ST. PAUL. MN 55102 PHONE (651) 287-<38880 FACSIMILE 1651) 287-<3889 August 30, 2005 Tom Ekstrand Senior Planner City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B E. Maplewood, MN 55109 RE: MSP/ Kennard Professional BuDding Dear Ms. Ekstrand: We are most pleased to submit herewith for appropriate approvals our project package for a professional office building within the Legacy Village of Maplewood. We have been working with the Hartford Group on the acquisition of the land and the overall design of the building and site. The total acreage of the site is approximately 6.5 acres. Hartford is concurrently applying for a lot split dividing the lot into !WO lots. We will be purchasing the westem lot contiguous to the roundabout which is approximately 3.5 acres. It is our intent at this time to lease the entire first floor of the new building to HealthEast for a clinic that will ultimately serve the community near the hospital. HealthEast has been in the market for additional space for some lime and our involvement in this project stems from our relationship with them. We have provided office / medical space to first class tenants throughout the Twin Cilies metro area, and communities have in tum benefited due to our tenant's professional and overall service provided. Specifically, the building will be !WO stories with 22,000 square foot floor plates. The paropet on the building will screen all the building mechanicals located on the roof in the middle of the building. Heavy landscaping will be used on the comer contiguous to the round about and will include an ADA pedestrian connection to our building from the city street. The southem side of the building will also be fuily landscaped with shrubs and plantings both on the bottom and top of the wall be!ween the city sidewalk and the building. We expect to begin construction on the project in this fall, 2005, and within the near future, we will begin active marketing and leasing of the second floor through United Properties brokerage. We think that you will find this proposal to be an exciting addition to Maplewood. Please feel free to contact us with any questions, and thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely. a07 hi.:..",-j~ED StY 0 1 2005 Alex Young Vice President WWW.MSPCOMME~CJAL.NET 6 , , :' , I " , , i , , i I , , :' , / , .' i ! i I / I ----' I i I , ....J ,r--- / J r i I Attachment 2 1-594 -/----.---c--r-------~-=--::c==--,,-_+fl=J fa!3;i 1+1 I" Efi "" [EB i .i:p i:i:; \\:i m !$i,' CJ! :' OJ[:tjt8 ,=ttI!LLJI -::.--== , j. .. , ---- ----- ~ , '[ i , i \ . COttN I Y KUAU U I , , I I l ~ \L----j I' ! I I PROPOSED LOT DIVISION ,", 1 " ~ Ii , I, ~ ~ ,..->"' , ........ / />-"\1 I ,k:" .~<>'\ I' ,;J j" I I 'I~.;r' I, 9 I~I 0 Ii It----!?/--c.., ii' '" ' I { i~ - 3// :1' i i~ o..l ~~~ ~I ' IZt I [;O', [ ,0, I , i \ ~--- I I, I >r \ I' r", I j ( I III I, ,I I! II ' ! ,W--L--'IIII I " " ' ~_IJ. i , ,- , - , ' I ' I , i i , , " \ I. 'i, I " \ , PROPOSED MEDICAL OFFICE SITE // f i ! , l :1 i f r---:! Ii i' " j7'---; I " . Ii i I ii i i I' :! !i \!~I, I I " I: I I""--i: I! i: , I, Ii, I, " I I ii I-! ' I rnl bl 01 01 ~I u: UJi N' r~ ~-~"'. ,I " I' ~ 11 . , I i " I i " '-- I r-' C, ( , I " ) , " (,..-- " I i i I I i I , \. I , , , I I I '! -",--1.., Ii -..._.______~---.J I, i ': I' Iffi r Ii, L_ Iii Ie I~ -I', ... [ I ~-I i I~I , r-- _ '---_L-r--L-' BEAM AVE ---, I ( I r J ! -- -- 1., , I. I HazeIWO:d.'" )~. I, 'I I I I i j " ...--L-_-----j , I , Haz !wP'~d Park i 'I I i I '1'1 'Ii Iii, I, I I " i I I H,-i:ITT-'r- --1 r-i I. ! I, I, I, i I I I I, I! ....L L r' I, I' I I, ~ L.J LOCATION MAP 7 aUIJNUlIu3 ,- --'..aal""~<"QI 1M9S~"fMo3rl'Wtlal8MO.l.g~g N'f'\d3dY.:lSCN'fl 'Ii .1:' . i 1 ) II I i I I ,) 1/ / .,. OJ~ , 1VI01f3l'lno::ldSl'I ~ VlOS3NNIVi'CClOM31dVVi ~NICI1Il'1B 1VN01SE::IO~d m/VNN3)I ;.llIIIri'-l.i:l~ , ""lWlI::IBIjIVQ./IilI " i I~ Ii ~I)I ~; .j~ :1 Ii Ii II I. I I. I I I l I l I I I I l I I l I Ili~;i! II ~ :'1 I,!!I ill. !Ii (il i, "!ill' Ij i ili i Iljllll Iii 'ii; j, II' ~ 1 i 1: 1: 1: Z Z Z 1: Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . i;i,lji 111 ill !I,! 'I il'ililllllli !'i ill!. I , I "~lll 'iI' i 'II ,~.!! !dIP! ; I II , I I I' I '" j'I',!'I',I: ! i ill i Mil '1!',11:1 i:'I',' rill ! I! li ; I I j I . (' 1I J ~ L I~! 11'1 iii' Ii I Ie;. I Ii;: . ~ I~ I 'd'i'l ,1"'1 I i 1.'1'1 1'1' ! ' 'j '! ., Ii' J l!jii!!i;1 I; jll Ii ~ MI I"11'1: ill~ i!l\i I j ll!di lld!l ~ Ii I j J I! II l ",! d. I ,,' 1!lq P ii": ~ !-!d I;h I ~I :11 .. ;~tq! 1,1 : ~_ G -I ~ R . E ~ I ~ . , ~ ~ t: ~ : II = i I " 11 11 I . I ~ li;iP ~~ q ii!!i 1111PI' lilt ilia ;il: i ; nl5 i Iii: !ii ~ i I ~ a ~ r ~ ~ d ; r n I ~ . ~ ~ .. ~ I , r I I ~ rb;li!:I~.~Il:q.ll~ :,::hl..iii.~,'il.i..L.1I0 f)$\") 00 OOOel .'00 .. ...,. L_ ~- j-- [= L.._ , 1== >-- L_ L_ !-..- ~= ~-= i--- ~,: ~= t.-~- 's,". ".\v-~ ~: I I I I !~~ I I I I h) "-1. ! L~I-I-I-'~H-!-I-ITI - -l ! i I ; I I ; ~t,;1 ; ; I I :..-\ j .'~ --~' ! '\;, - , : II! II ~ IIIII '1 -.: 1 rhl-i-1-I-~-I-H+-tj! = i L I I I I I ~,,',": I, " I I I U ~- i ,-" - .; '.7f~ . ""I"":"~= 1 ~ 5 . w . , ~ . , , - . . i _I ~l 1 Iii! J ~.Pili ., . m-t , ii' Ii . ~! . 1'1, II , iii II . 0 z ~ < ~ ., ~i el ~l I') , : : , : : , , , i , , I : \ ~, " " " " " ", " , . '~:-:.::-,- I l" ~ : f I ~ 1 i ..( . I ~!111 ,II 1;1 ~i" ~il ;.- illl ~, i f IllllJllfl!h ) . . · i~ I 1, ~ 1 ; II:' ,II . II! In !I 'II i1'ltl il j iliilj I -------:- -::=:::::::---:::------ 1---- SITE / LANDSCAPING PLAN 8 Attachment 3 ~ ~ _O'....,j ~- " Q I 81 I I~l! i Zii.1 ! i !ll Io~ o , o z ~ ;; , ~i 8, .. N o ~ , Attachment 4 I \ S P , ( \ 'II/'I\'ll k I \l 350 ST. PETER STREET. SlJITE 200 Q ST. PAL1L.1.fN 55102 PHDNE (651) 287-8888 " FAc,""m.E (651) 287-8889 September 13, 2005 Tom Ekstrand City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B E. Maplewood, MN 55109 RE: Comprehensive Sign Plan/Kennard Professional Building Dear Mr, Ekstrand: The Kennard Professional Building has identified three exterior areas that require building identification and tenant names, as follows: Two monument signs as shown on the site plan, one in the corner of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Avenue, and the other located at our curb cut into the site. Both signs would be approximately 7' in height and 14'- 8" in length. These two signs would be designed and constructed of the same materials as the building and would identify the building name and address in addition to business names for approximately four tenants. The lettering on both signs would be no larger than 5" in height and would be uniform in font and color. All lettering material will be cast metal with a baked enamel finish and will not be backlit. The third location for exterior signage will be on the southwest elevation (the side that is 45 degrees to the intersection) which is approximately 40' in length. The lettering for both the building name and tenant names will be of the same materials used on the monument signs. Twelve inch letters will be used for the tenant's names (approximately four) and fifteen inch letters will be used for the building name. This lettering will also not be back lit and all the lettering will be in a uniform font. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, ($07 Alex Young Vice President WWW.MSPCOMMERCIAL.NET 9 ~lZl~lZl ~~U ne IZIIZIIZIIZI ::; ~~:~ "~m~ ~g 11111' I I ~J JIIIII__ I H11! ill I! !( 'I' ! I; ! Ii ! l !!il r" --.., I , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . , , , , , , , , , , " 1 ' , i : :.~ -fJ : I, L~ II ., It II 10 Attachment 5 i~ 1-< ~ ,...., j ~ ~ ~ dl = a.. I.J..I en ., 1!'~lq 2i ~ i . . ; i I I al.l ~ih ! ,J " ~,! o ~ ~ .,' ~"'~ n~ ip::: ...::!:;: .. Attachment 6 Kennard Professional Buildim!: MaDlewood. MN Proposed Exterior Building Materials: . CMU-I (Watertable): 8" Rock-face block: Amcon Block- 'Salmon' · FB-I (FieldJPier Brick): Utiltiy Brick: Ochs Brick - 'Sunrise Dark Velour' · FB-2 (Accent Brick): Utiltiy Brick: Ochs Brick - 'Riverside Rockface' · FB-3 (Accent Brick): Glazed Brick: Spectra Glaze - 'Deep Leaf Green' · FB-4 (Accent Brick): Glazed Brick: Spectra Glaze - ' Deep Pumpkin' . PM-I: Una-Clad - 'Sherwood Green' -Roof Fascia coping · PM-2: Una-Clad - 'Sherwood Green' - Canopy Metal · PM-3: Una-Clad - 'Dark Bronze' - Window Flashing . PM-4: Una-Clad - 'Sierra Tan' - Water Table Flashing · Eifs 1: Dryvit- Custom Color QT 143-100-07-21-01, Quartzputz · Eifs 2: Dryvit - 'Oyster Shell' (456) Quartzputz . Eifs 3: Dryvit- Custom Color: match S.W, 6099 (Sand Dollar), Quartzputz · Soffit Panels: Alside, 'Antique Parchement' · PT-l: Sherwin Williams, SW6100 'Practical Beige' Flat · PT-2: Sherwin Williams, SW7020 'Black Fox' Gloss · PT-3: Sherwin Williams, Custom, Gloss: match Brick FB-l RECEIVEu SEP 0 1 2005 11 Enl!ineerinl! Plan Review PROJECT: MSP Commercial- Kennard Professional Building PROJECT NO: REVIEWED BY: Erin Laberee DATE: September 19, 2005 MSP Commercial is proposing a medical office building in Legacy Village at the NE corner of the Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway. They are proposing to treat runoff in a temporary pond east of the site. The developer and engineer shall address the following issues. Gradinl! & Erosion Control 1. A building permit will be required for proposed retaining walls greater than four feet high. A plan and a specific soil stabilization detail for the wall design will be required as part of the building permit. All walls greater than four feet in height require fencing. 2. Grading permits from the city, Watershed, and MPCA (new NPDES Construction Permit) are required. 3. The infiltration basin detail calls out for 1 foot of compacted native soil. The soil shall not be compacted and the native ground shall be scarified to promote infiltration. The engineer shall revise the infiltration detail to reflect this. 4. Inlet protection shall be included in the erosion control plan. Utilities 1. The applicants shall submit plans to Saint Paul Regional Water Services for their reView. Drainal!:e 1. The proposed plan shows runoff directed into the existing pond to the east. The design of the existing pond did not account for drainage from the Kennard Professional Building site. Drainage from the site must comply with the Storm Water Management Plan for the mall area and should be directed to the south and the west as outlined in the plan. The applicant shall submit drainage calculations and show compliance with the storm water management plan for the mall area. To comply, the site needs to store and infiltrate runoff from a I" storm event. The enhanced storm water management practices worksheet needs to filled out to show that this requirement is met. 2. The applicant shall obtain off-site drainage and utility easements. 3. The proposed storm sewer shall extend to the NWL of the existing pond. Misc. 1. The applicant shall make a connection to the sidewalk along Legacy Parkway from the east end of the proposed building. 2. The landscape plan shall include vegetation in the infiltration basin.