Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-01-17 CDRB Packet AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, January 17, 2017 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: a. October 25, 2016 b. November 15, 2016 5. Design Review: a. Consider Approval of Hazelwood Medical Commons – Phase 2, 2945 Hazelwood Street North 1. Design Review 2. Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment b. Consider Approval of Design Review for new McDonalds Building, 1797 Cope Avenue East c. Consider Approval of New Buildings at Maple Ridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue 1. Design Review 2. Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment 6. New Business: a. 2016 Code Enforcement Year-End Report b. Election of Officers (No report) 7. Visitor Presentations: 8. Board Presentations: 9. Staff Presentations: 10. Adjourn MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2016 1.CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Kempecalled the meeting to order at5:02p.m. 2.ROLL CALL Chairperson, Bill KempeAbsent Boardmember,Jason LamersPresent Vice Chairperson,Matt LedvinaPresent Boardmember,Ananth ShankarPresent Staff Present:Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner 3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA BoardmemberShankarmoved to approve the agenda as submitted. Seconded by BoardmemberLamers.Ayes -All The motion passed. 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES BoardmemberLamersmoved to approve the September 20,2016,CDRB minutes as submitted. Seconded by BoardmemberShankar.Ayes –Boardmember Lamers & Boardmember Shankar Abstention –Acting ChairLedvina The motion passed. 5.DESIGN REVIEW a.Consideration of Rice Street Shoppes, 2158 Rice Street North A.Design Review B.Comprehensive Sign Plan for a Shared Sign i.Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall gave the report on the Rice Street Shoppes, 2158 Rice Street North and answered questions of the commission. ii.Development Partner, Steve Johnson, Solomon Real Estate Group, Eden Prairie, MN, addressed and answered questions of the board. iii.Civil Architect, Dan Parks, Westwood Professional Services, 7699 Anagram Drive, Eden Prairie, MN, addressed and answered questions of the board. iv.Architect, Jack Amdahl, Studio 55 Architects, 10700 Highway 55, Suite 275, Plymouth, MN, addressed and answered questions of the board. October 25, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 1 The board discussed their concerns about the north elevation design elements and the number of wall signs proposed for the western tenant space. Boardmember Lamersmoved to approvethe plans date-stamped October 11, 2016, for the Rice Street Shoppes development. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions (additions are bolded and underlined): 1.Approval of design plans is good for two years. If the applicant has not begun construction within two years, this design review shall be repeated. Staff may approve minor changes to these plans. 2.The applicant shall comply with the conditions noted in the engineering report by Jon Jarosch dated October 10, 2016. 3.Submit to staff copies of the executed agreements for cross-access, parking and drainage between the applicant and the property owner of 100 County Road B West. 4.Submit to staff a revised landscape plan showing additional trees to meet the city’s tree preservation requirements or prior to receiving a building permit submit the required fee for the city’s tree fund to meet the tree preservation requirements. 5.The applicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit or cash escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of installing the landscaping, before getting a building permit. 6.Submit to staff to approve a revised north elevation showing the following: a) taller parapet in the center of the building; b) awning below signage band in the center of the building; c) contrasting color of EIFS material on the bottom of the building from the top of the building. 7.Approval from Ramsey County for access onto County Road B from the private drive located on the east side of the property. 8.If the property is found to have contaminated soils, the applicants will further investigate and take action per the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements. Boardmember Lamers moved to approve the comprehensive sign plan to allow a shared sign at 2158 Rice Street North. Approval of the comprehensive sign plan is subject to the following conditions(additions are bolded and underlined): 1.Rice Street Freestanding Sign: a.Shared signage is only allowed on the 20-foot high, 144 s.f.freestandingsign proposed to be located adjacent to Rice Street North. b.Only tenants of the 2158 Rice Street building and the grocery store located at 100 County Road B West are permitted to have panelson the Rice Street freestanding sign. c.Prior to issuance of a sign permit the applicant shall submit: October 25, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 2 1)Acopy of the agreement between the property owners of 2158 Rice Street North and 100 County Road B West allowing for the maintenance of and access to the shared sign. 2)A site plan showing the location of the proposed freestanding sign meeting the required 10 foot setback from property lines. 3)A site plan showing the location of the proposed freestanding signs meeting the required 10 foot setback from property lines. 2.County Road B Freestanding Sign: Prior to issuance of a sign permit applicant must submit a site plan showing the location of proposed freestanding sign meeting the required 10 foot setback from property line. 3.Wall Signs: All wall signs must comply with the city’s sign code, including maximum number and size of signs per tenant space. Seconded by Acting Chairperson Ledvina.Ayes –All Acting Chairperson Ledvina and Boardmember Shankar made friendly amendments which were accepted by Boardmember Lamers. The motion passed. This item does not go onto the city council for review. b.Consider Approval of Revised Design Plans for a Proposed IndoorStorage Building, 1315 Cope Avenue East i.Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall gave the report on the Revised Design Plans for a Proposed Indoor Storage Building at 1315 Cope Avenue East. ii.J.J. Jenkins of Northpoint Development addressed and answered questions of the board. Boardmember Lamers moved to approvethe plans date-stamped October 19, 2016, for the indoor storage building to be located at 1315 Cope Avenue East.Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following(changes are bolded and stricken): 1.Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2.Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant must submit to staff for approval the following items: 3.A revised landscaping plan showing the size, species, and location of all significant trees on the property; location of trees protected and measures for protection. The addition of multiple species for the trees to be planted on the north elevation to be approved by staff. October 25, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 3 a.The revised building plans showing the required additional design elements to the west and north elevations shall be submitted to the city for approval of the required building permits. b.A revised photometric plan which meets all city lighting requirements. c.An irrevocable letter of credit or cash escrow for all required landscaping. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. The city shall hold this escrow until it has been shown that the landscaping has survived one full growing season. 4.Signage on the property is not part of the design review approval. The applicant shall apply for sign permits to be reviewed by staff. 5.Comply with all requirements of the revised engineering report dated October 19, 2016. 6.All work shall follow the approved plans andthese conditions. Staff may approve minor changes. 7.The applicant shall present the design of the dumpster enclosure for staff approval and the dumpster shall be constructed of materials and colors to match the indoor storage building. Seconded by Boardmember Shankar.Ayes –All The motion passed. 6.NEW BUSINESS None. 7.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. 8.BOARDPRESENTATIONS None. 9.STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. 10.ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Acting Chairperson Ledvinaat6:04p.m. October 25, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 4 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2016 1.CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Kempecalled the meeting to order at6:00p.m. 2.ROLL CALL Chairperson, Bill KempePresent Boardmember,Jason LamersAbsent Vice Chairperson,Matt LedvinaPresent Boardmember,Ananth ShankarPresent Staff Present:Michael Martin, Economic Development Coordinator 3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA BoardmemberShankarmoved to approve the agenda as submitted. Seconded by BoardmemberLedvina.Ayes -All The motion passed. 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES BoardmemberLedvinamoved to tablethe October 25,2016,CDRB minutes for further clarification regarding language for 5. a. Consideration of Rice Street Shoppes, 2158 Rice Street North regarding the comprehensive sign plan and bring the minutes back for approval at the next CDRB meeting. Seconded by BoardmemberShankar.Ayes –Boardmember’s Ledvina & Shankar Abstention –Chairperson Kempe The motion passed. 5.DESIGN REVIEW a.Consider Approval of Design Review for the Metro Heating and Cooling Expansion, 2303 Atlantic Street North i.Economic Development Coordinator, Mike Martin gave the report on the Consideration of Approval of Design Review for the Metro Heating and Cooling Expansion at 2303 Atlantic Street North. ii.Architect, Progressive Architecture, 4920 Otter Lake Road, White Bear Lake, Scott Mower, addressed and answered questions of the board. November 15, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 1 Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approve the plans date-stamped November 7, 2016, for Metro Heating and Cooling’s proposed building expansion. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: A.This approval is good for two years. After two years, the design-review process shall be repeated if the developer has not begun construction. B.All requirements of the fire marshal and building official must be met. C.The applicants shall comply with all requirements of the Maplewood Engineering report from Jon Jarosch dated November 8, 2016. D.The applicants shall provide the city with cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for 150 percent of the proposed exterior landscaping and site improvements prior to getting a building permit for the development. E.The applicant shall provide a screening fence between its trash containers and the neighboring property to the west. All trash enclosures must be kept on the south end of the building, as indicated by the applicant’s plans, and out of the view from the public right-of-ways. F.The removal ofthe existing asphalt for the parking lot will not require the applicant to install concrete curbing as determined by the city engineer. G.All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of environmental and economic development may approve minor changes. Seconded by Boardmember Shankar.Ayes –All The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on November 28, 2016. b.Consider Approval of the Maplewood Alzheimer’s Special Care Center, 1700 Beam Avenue i.Economic Development Coordinator, MikeMartin gave the report on Considering Approval of the Maplewood Alzheimer’s Special Care Center at 1700 Beam Avenue. ii.Representative from JEA Development/Senior Living, Rachel Rudiger, Apple Valley, addressed and answered questions of the board. 1.Design Review 2.Parking Waiver Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approvethe plans date-stamped September 30, 2016, for the Maplewood Alzheimer’s Special Care Center at 1700 Beam Avenue. Approval is subject to the applicant complying with the following conditions:(changes or additions are in bold and underlined). a.Approval of design plans is good for two years. If the applicant has not begun construction within two years, this design review shall be repeated. Staff may approve minor changes to these plans. November 15, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 2 b.The applicant shall comply with the conditions noted in Jon Jarosch’s city engineering report dated October 31, 2016, and Erin Laberee’s county engineering report dated November 3, 2016. c.The applicant shall comply with the conditions noted in Shann Finwall’s and Virginia Gaynor’s Environmental report dated November 8, 2016. d.Submit to staff copies of the executed cross access agreements for Lots 1 through 4. e.Submit to staff a revised lighting plan which shows outdoor lights do not exceed .4 foot candles of lumens at the property line. f.Submit to staff a revised site plan which shows the concrete sidewalk extending from the westerly lot of Lot 1 to the existing sidewalk located in front of Lot 3. g.All signage on the property must comply with the city’s sign ordinanceand requires separate sign permits. h.The applicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit or cash escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of installing the landscaping, before getting a building permit. i.The applicant shall include brick wainscotingto matchthe brick used around the buildingexterior and the top of the wainscot shall line up with the bottom of the window in the front of the building. Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approve the parking waiver of 59 parking spaces for the Maplewood Alzheimer’s Special Care Center at 1700 Beam Avenue. City ordinance requires 100 parking spaces for this site, and the proposed project will provide 41 parking spaces. If a parking shortage develops the city council may require the applicant to secure more parking spaces. Seconded by Chairperson Kempe.Ayes –All Boardmember Shankar made a friendly amendment to condition i. adding (the top of the wainscot shall line up with the bottom of the window in the front of the building). The friendlyamendment was acceptable to Boardmember Ledvina and Chairperson Kempe. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on November 28, 2016. c.Consider Approval of New Buildings at Maple Ridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue i.Economic Development Coordinator, Mike Martin gave the report on Considering Approval of New Buildings at Maple Ridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue and answered questions of the board. ii.Architect, Firm Ground, 275 Market Street, Suite 368, Minneapolis, Jeff Schuler, addressed and answered questions of the board. November 15, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 3 iii.Principal &CEO, Firm Ground, 275 Market Street, Suite 368, Minneapolis, Tom Wasmoen, addressed and answered questions of the board. 1.Design Review 2.Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment 3.Parking Waiver Boardmember Ledvina expressed strong concerns about the tightness of the site with two buildings in this location, the closeness to White Bear Avenue, access and traffic flow concerns, the usability of the location and the way the site plan islaidout. Chairperson Kempe moved to approve the site plan for the north building and recommendedthe landscape island be removed. The applicant shall come back before the CDRBwith a revised site plan for the south building and further information. The motion failedfor a lack of a second. Boardmember Ledvinamoved to deny the north building elevationand approve the plans date-stamped November 7, 2016, for Starpoint Properties’ proposal to build twoonenew buildingsat the Maple Ridge Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue. The application shall resubmit building elevations for the south building with the modifications discussed at the CDRB Meeting. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: (changes or additions are A.This approval is good for two years. After two years, the design-review process shall be repeated if the developer has not begun construction. B.All requirements of the fire marshal and building official must be met. C.Maintain drive aisles of at least 24 feet in width. D.The applicants shall comply with all requirements of the Maplewood Engineering Report from Jon Jarosch dated November 8, 2016. E.The applicants shall provide the city with cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for 150 percent of the proposed exterior landscaping and site improvements prior to getting a building permit for the development. F.The applicant shall submit revised building elevations for staff approval including additional architectural detail on the west elevations of each building. The applicant shall also increase the amount of brick one each building while reducing the use of concrete blocks. G.The applicant shall repair all potholes and other substandard sections of the existing parking lot. H.The applicant shall place all trash containers in enclosures and ensure the west side of the lot is kept clear of debris and trash. I.All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of environmental and economic development may approve minor changes. November 15, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 4 Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approve the comprehensive sign plan amendment to allow signage for a new standalone building at the Maple Ridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue. Approval of the comprehensive sign plan amendment is subject to the following conditions: A.The existing shopping center and grocery store buildings will continue to be regulated by previous comprehensive sign plan approvals. No changes to signage requirements for those two buildings are approved. B.Each tenant of the two new buildings will be allowed two wall signs. C.The location of wall signs is limited to the east and west elevations of the buildings, with a tenant allowed up to one sign per elevation. D.Each wall sign shall be comprised of individual channel letters. Cabinet signs are prohibited. E.The size of each wall sign must comply with the city’s sign ordinance requirements. Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approve the parking waiver of 24 spaces for 2515 White Bear Avenue. City ordinance requires 608 stalls for this site and proposed project and 512 will be provided plus the 72 proof-of-parking spaces available if a parking shortage develops. Seconded by BoardmemberShankar.Ayes –Boardmember’s Ledvina & Shankar Nay –Chairperson Kempe The motion passed. 6.NEW BUSINESS None. 7.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. 8.BOARDPRESENTATIONS None. 9.STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. 10.ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Kempeat7:13p.m. November 15, 2016 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 5 MEMORANDUM TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator DATE:January 10, 2017 SUBJECT:Consider Approval of Hazelwood Medical Commons –Phase 2, 2945 Hazelwood Street North a.Design Review b.Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment Introduction Patrick Giordana, on behalf of Davis Group Development, is seeking approval to build all three levels of the 60,000 square foot second phase of a medical office building on the vacant property located at 2945 Hazelwood Street North. Last summer, the city council approved a conditional use permit for the entire project but required design review for each additional phase. The first phase of this project –an 80,000 square foot medical office building –has already been approved and is currently under construction. The applicant has previously received CDRB approval to begin the first floor of the second phase but is now seeking approval tobuildall three level and complete the entire building. Background On November 10, 1997, the city council approved a conditional use permit and design review for a fuel station, convenience store, bank and car wash. This project now sits on a separate legal parcel. On June 27, 2016, the city council approved, a conditionaluse permit, design plans, a comprehensive sign plan and a lot division for the Hazelwood Medical Commons. On September 20, 2016, the community design review board reviewed and approved the start of Phase 2 of this project but had not approved all three levels. Discussion Design Review Architectural The building’s exterior will consist of stone and brick veneer, composite metal panels and roof cap details, glass curtain walls and punched style windows. The materials and colors proposed for the entire second phase match and are consistent with that was proposed for the building’s first phase. This request is for approval of all three levels which will now be built at one time. Site Layout No significant changes are being proposed to the site plan. The primary access to the site is fromHazelwood Street which aligns with the main access to St. John’s Hospital –Hazelwood has already been programmed for this access. The proposed building and parking lot meet all setback requirements –including the required 100 foot setback between the medical office building and the north property line. The site’s stormwater pond has been shifted further to the south where a separate commercial retail building pad had previouslybeen proposed. At this time the developer does not intend to move forward with this building project. Parking City ordinance requires 700 spaces for this site –one space for every 200 square feet of space. In June 2016, the city council approved a parking waiver of 88 spaces meaning the applicant needed to provide at least 612 parking spaces. The applicant’s revised site plan shows 650 spaces provided –still 50 spaces short of ordinance requirements but more than what council has allowed the applicant to reduce parking by. At the September CDRB meeting, the Board wanted justification as to why more additional spaces could not be removed from the site. The applicant has indicated it needs to provide a certain amount of parking spaces to meet leasing requirements but also to meet the parking needs they have experienced at their other medical office buildings in the Twin Cities. Staff is supportive of the revised site plan and feels it meets the intention of the original parking waiver request that was approved last summer while also adding more parking spaces back into the site. Landscaping The applicantremoved 832 inches of trees during the initial mass grading of thisproject.The city’s tree preservation ordinance required that the applicantreplace 967.7 caliper inches of trees on the site.The landscape plan dated August 26, 2016, showed the replacement of 909 caliper inches of trees.Since there was no additional room to plant trees on the site, the applicant opted to pay into the City'stree fund.The tree fund payment was $60 per caliper inch of tree that could not be replaced on site, for a total payment of $3,522.The applicant submitted the tree fund payment to the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. The plant list legend on the revised landscape plan dated December 1, 2016, reflects a total of 708 caliper inches of replacement trees.However, the final note on the plant list legend states that the proposed replacement amount is 839 caliper inches.The applicant should submit a revised landscape plan showing the correct amount of replacement trees on the site, or submit an explanation showing how the 839 caliper inches of trees is calculated (i.e., including woody shrubs planted around the ponding area as part of the replacement requirement).Additionally, the applicant should submit a revised landscape plan which shows a total of 909 caliper inches of replacement trees, or pay an additional fee into the City’s tree fund.The additional fee is $60 per caliper inch of required 909 caliper inches of replacement trees that cannot be replaced on site. Lighting The applicant’s lighting plan meets ordinance requirements. Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment Comprehensive sign plans are required for business premises with five or more tenants on the premises and all multiple-story buildings with two or more tenants in the building.The applicant received approval of a comprehensive sign plan for its’ first phase and the plan included a main 10’ x 30’ sign overthe main entrance, three 3’ x 25’ tenant signs on the east building elevation and two 3’ x 25’ tenant signs on the south building elevation. The signs will have channel letters and each letter shall not be any taller than 48 inches. The applicant also received approval for a single monument sign along Hazelwood Avenue. This sign was tobe 12 feet tall and its base will incorporate similar materials and design as the building The applicant is seeking approval of a comprehensive plan amendment to addfive additional 3’ x 25’ tenant signs on the east building elevation –meaning three 3’ x 25’ tenant signs would be south of the main entrance and balanced by five more 3’ x 25’ tenant signs north of the main entrance. The five additional signs would be placed in similar positions as the previously approved tenant signs. The applicant is also requesting the heightof the monument sign along Hazelwood Street be increased from 12 feet to 16 feet. Department Comments EngineeringDepartment, Jon Jarosch Please see Jon Jarosch’s engineering report, dated January 6, 2017, attached to this report. Building Official, Jason Brash Build per 2012 IBC, 2012 IMC, 2012 IFGC, 2014 NEC, 2012 Minnesota State Plumbing Code, 2015 Minnesota State Fire Code, MN 2015 Accessibility code, and 2015 Minnesota Building Code. Demonstrate compliance with all the requirements of the 2012 Minnesota Energy Code Chapter 1323 Section C401.2. Mixing 2012 IECC provisions and ASHRAE Standard 90.1 to obtain compliance is not an option. The following forms must be completed as submittals. a.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Building Envelope Compliance Documentation b.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 HVAC Compliance Documentation c.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Service Water Heating Compliance Documentation d.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Lighting Compliance Documentation Special inspections required as per 2012 IBC Chapter 17. Complete supporting special inspection schedule document and submit with plan review response. Plumbing plans shall be submitted to the State Plumbing Department for approvalprior to the issuance of a plumbing permit.St Paul water requires permits for water piping Maplewood requires permit for drain waste and vent. Permits are required for building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, Health, fire alarm, and sprinklers. Fire Department, Fire Marshal Butch Gervais I have no concerns as they will need to meet the same requirements I outlined for the first phase of the construction. Police Department, Chief Paul Schnell No issues Recommendations A.Approve the design plans date-stamped December 23, 2016, for phase two of the proposed medical office building at 2945 Hazelwood Street North. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: 1.Approval of design plans is good for two years. If the applicant has not begun construction within two years, this design review shall be repeated. 2.Approval includes all three stories of the second phase of the medical office building and three levels must be constructed within same project. 3.All trash receptacles must either be kept inside the building or an outside trash enclosure must be built on site. 4.Satisfy the requirements set forth in the engineering report authored by Jon Jarosch, datedJanuary 6, 2017. 5.Submit the following for staff approval before the city issues a building permit: a.Final grading, paving, drainage, utility, traffic/street improvement and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet the requirements of the city code and the city engineer. b.A revised landscaping plan detailing the correct calculations for the city’s tree preservation requirements and either adding more trees to meet the requirements or pay into the city’s tree fund. 6.The applicant or the contractor shall complete the following before occupying the building: a.Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. b.Install a reflectorized stop sign at the exits and a handicap-parking sign for each handicap accessible parking space. c.Install an in-ground lawn irrigation system for the parking lot islands and for all landscape areas (except the ponding areas).Post signs identifying the customer and employee parking spaces. d.Install all the required exterior improvements, including landscaping and signs. e.Install all bituminous and the engineered porous or permeable surface and the curb and gutter. f.Stripe all drive aisles. g.Install all required landscaping by June 1 if the building is finished in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of completion if it is finished in the spring or summer. h.Install all exterior lighting. i.Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from public streets. 7.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 thepublic health, safety or welfare. b.The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shallcomplete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 if occupancy of thebuilding is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy of the building ifoccupancy is in the spring or summer. 8.All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of the environmental and economic development department may approve minor changes. B.Approve the plans date-stamped December 23, 2016for a comprehensive sign plan amendment to allow signage for a new medical office building located at 2945 Hazelwood Street North. Approval of the comprehensive sign plan amendment is subject to the following conditions(additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): 1.Signs on the east elevation shall be limited to one 10’ x 30’ sign over the main entrance andeightthree3’ x 25’ tenant signs.Three 3’ x 25’ tenant signs shall be located south of the main entrance and five 3’ x 25’ tenant signs shall be located north of the main entrance. Locations of the tenant signs shall be restricted to the areas displayed within the applicant’s proposed building elevations. 2.Signs on the south elevation shall be limited to two 3’ x 25’ tenant signs. 3.No signs are permitted for the west or north elevations. 4.All wall signs shall be of individual letters and each letter shall be no more than 48 inches in height. 5.One monument sign is allowed along the Hazelwood Street frontage. The monument sign must be no more than1612feet in height and must incorporate building materials and design in its base. Reference Information Site Description Site size: 9.13 acres Existing land use: Vacant, construction has started on phase one of Hazelwood Medical Commons Surrounding Land Uses North: Cardinal Pointe South: Beam Avenue, fuel station and bank West: Bruce Vento Trail East:Hazelwood Street and St. John’s Hospital Planning Existing Land Use:Commercial (C) Existing Zoning:Light Manufacturing(M1) Attachments 1.Location Map 2.Site Plan 3.Landscape Plan 4.Building Elevations 5.Jon Jarosch, engineering comments, dated January 6, 2017 6.Applicant’s plan set (separate attachment) Attachment 1 Maplewood Heights Kohlman Lake Hazelwood Sherwood Glen Parkside Western Hills Gladstone Hillside Beaver Lake Battle Creek Vista Hills Highwood Carver Ridge Maplewood, City of Maplewood Hazelwood Medical Office Building - Overview Map Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Conditional Use Permit, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, Design Review, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, Comprehensive Sign Plan MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the and Lot Division GIS user community W:\\2016\\16108\\CADD DATA\\CIVIL\\_dwg Sheet Files\\PHASE 2\\C2-1 Plotted: 12 /20 / 2016 9:17 AM Attachment 2 EXISTING POST INDICATOR VALVE TELEPHONE MANHOLE UNDERGROUND GASUNDERGROUND TELE DIRECTION OF FLOW SANITARY MANHOLE HANDICAP PARKING ELECTRIC MANHOLE OVERHEAD UTILITY CIVIL LEGEND SANITARY SERVICEUTILITY MANHOLESTORM MANHOLE WATER MANHOLE RETAINING WALLSANITARY SEWER SPOT ELEVATION CURB & GUTTER EASEMENT LINEWATER SERVICE STORM SEWERSOIL BORINGS SETBACK LINECATCH BASIN BENCHMARKPOWER POLE WATERMAIN FORCEMAIN CONTOURSLIGHT POLEGATEVALVE FENCE LINE SILT FENCEHYDRANT DRAINTILE CULVERT TREELINE SIGN PROPOSED B612 CURB & GUTTERHEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUSLIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUSHEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT TYPE CONCRETE SIDEWALK 17.SEE STRUCTURAL 25/5311 & LIGHTING PLAN SL-1 FOR POLE & FIXTURE16.BITUMINOUS IMPREGNATED FIBER BOARD TO BE PLACED AT FULL DEPTH OF15.ALL CURB RADII SHALL BE 3.0' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.14.TYPICAL FULL SIZED PARKING STALL IS 9.5' X 18' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13.ALL CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE12.ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES SHALL BE PROVIDED PER CURRENT11.SEE SHEETS C3-1 AND C4-1 FOR GRADING AND UTILITIES.10.PEDESTRIAN RAMPS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE LOCATIONS SHOWN AND AS9.B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE OF ALL8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS FROM THE CITY AS7.ANY SIGN OR FIXTURES REMOVED WITH IN THE RIGHT OF WAY OR AS PART OF THE6.MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE REQUIRES NOTIFICATION PER "GOPHER STATE ONE5.THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT. AND4.ALL PAVING, CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK SHALL BE FURNISHED AND3.2.1.SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS.NOTED.REQUIRED FOR ALL WORK WITH THE STREET AND PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.EXISTING STREET LIGHTS AND TRAFFIC SIGNS PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.DRIVEWAYS).PLANS FOR ANY ADDITIONAL HARDSCAPE APPLICATIONS.INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DETAILS SHOWN PER SHEET C8-1 & C8-2PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA = 303,275 SF = 6.962 ACRES = 74.6%EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA = 1,833 SF = 0.04AC. = 0.005% PARKINGSTREET=15 FEETBUILDING STREET=30 FEETEMPLOYEE STALLS = 126 SPECIFICATIONSCONCRETE ADJACENT TO EXISTING STRUCTURES AND BEHIND CURB ADJACENT TOADA STANDARDS AND LOCAL/STATE REQUIREMENTS.SHOWN PER THE LANDSCAPE SITE PLANS.COMMON DRIVES AND PARKING LOTS.CITY REQUIREMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN ANYSITE WORK SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEWORK.CALL" PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY GRADING, EXCAVATION OR UNDERGROUNDANY WORK WITHIN THE STREET RIGHT OF WAY (SIDEWALK, STREET ORTHE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TOAND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. SEE LANDSCAPE AND ARCHITECTURALTOTAL SITE AREA = 406,264 SF = 9.327 AC.AREA/DENSITYSETBACKSTOTAL PARKING STALLS =650SURFACE HANDICAPPED STALLS = 18SURFACE REGULAR STALLS = 506PARKING SUMMARY RESIDENTIAL=20 FEETINTERIOR LOT=5 FEETRESIDENTIAL=100 FEET DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGEDCABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORELEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES,MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 ATTHE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL WARNING: laws of the State of Minnesota.I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under theprepared by me or under my direct supervision and thatI hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was 12/19/1610/28/16 C8-2CIVIL DETAILSC8-1CIVIL DETAILSC4-1UTILITY PLANC3-2 & 3-3SWPPPC3-1GRADING/DRAINAGE PLANC2-1SITE PLANC1-1EXISTING CONDITIONSReview DateChecked ByDrawn ByProject LeadLoucks Project No.DateLicense No.08/26/1608/24/1608/17/1607/22/1607/21/1606/17/1605/27/1604/22/1603/18/16 Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities.or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify themade at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additionsrevisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall beinformation and reference only. All intentional or unintentionalpermitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files forConsultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may beof this project by others without written approval by theon other projects, for additions to this project, or for completionwith respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be usedinstruments of the Consultant professional services for use solelyCADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are 222 SOUTH 9TH STREET, SUITE 3255 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE HAZELWOOD PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE L THE DAVIS GROUP 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION OUCKS SITE PLANSITE PLAN Maplewood, Minnesota Maple Grove, MN 55369 CONSTR. DOCUMENTS PJ Disch - PE CITY/WATERSHED REV. PRELIMINARY PRICINGPRELIMINARY PRICING C2-1C2-1 CHANGE DIRECTIVE 9CHANGE DIRECTIVE 7CHANGE DIRECTIVE 2 CHANGE DIRECTIVE 1 QUALITY CONTROL CIVIL ENGINEERING PHASE 2 ENVIRONMENTAL LAND SURVEYING www.loucksinc.com CITY SUBMITTALCITY SUBMITTAL M.O.B. SHEET INDEX 763.424.5505 PERMIT SET PLANNING 06/17/1606/17/16 49933 16108 DDL PJDPJD W:\\2016\\16108\\CADD DATA\\LANDSCAPE\\_dwg Sheet Files\\Phase 2\\L1-1 Plotted: 12 /20 / 2016 8:40 AM Attachment 3 DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGEDCABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORELEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES,THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 ATMAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES INTHE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL WARNING: L2-1TREE PRESERVATION PLANL1-1Checked ByProject Lead12/19/16CITY SUBMITTAL11/01/16CHANGE DIRECTIVE 908/26/16CHANGE DIRECTIVE 708/05/16CITY COMMENTS07/29/16LANDSCAPE CHANGES06/17/16Construction Documents06/07/16Landscape Changes05/27/16PRELIMINARY PRICING04/22/16CITY SUBMITTAL03/18/16PRELIMINARY PRICING Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities.or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify themade at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additionsrevisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall beinformation and reference only. All intentional or unintentionalpermitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files forConsultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may beof this project by others without written approval by theon other projects, for additions to this project, or for completionwith respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be usedinstruments of the Consultant professional services for use solelyCADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed LandscapeI hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my 222 SOUTH 9TH STREET, SUITE 3255 Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Debra Brodsho REG. NO. HAZELWOOD PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE LANDSCAPE THE DAVIS GROUP MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 23849 SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION Maplewood, Minnesota QUALITY CONTROL L1-1 PHASE 2 LANDSCAPE PLAN DATE M.O.B. PLAN 08/26/16 DBDB Attachment 4 Attachment 5 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Hazelwood Medical Office Building Phase III PROJECT NO: 16-09 COMMENTS BY: Jon Jarosch, P.E. – Staff Engineer DATE: 1-6-2017 PLAN SET: Engineering plansdated 12-19-2016 Theapplicant is proposing to construct the thirdphase of the previously approved Hazelwood Medical Office Building. The applicant is requesting a review of the current design. Along with the addition of the third story to the building, the site plan has changed from the drawings that were originally submitted.As such, new stormwater calculations were submitted to match the proposed site layout. The new stormwater management plan continues to meet the City’s requirements and has been approved by the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. Thefollowing are engineeringreview comments on the design and act as conditions prior to issuing permits. General Comments 1)All conditions of the original grading permit remain in effect for Phase III. 2)The applicant shall be responsible for paying any SAC, WAC, or PAC charges related to the improvements proposed with Phase III ofthis project.A new SAC determination is required for Phase III and any additional charges shall be paid prior to permit issuance. 3)Changes to the potable water system shall be reviewed bySaint Paul regional Water Services. Public Works Permits The following permits are required by the Public Works Department for this project. The applicant should verify the need for other City permits with the Building Department. 4)Grading and erosion control permit – Work can be performed under existing permit. -END COMMENTS - MEMORANDUM TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator DATE:January 10, 2017 SUBJECT:Consider Approval of Design Review for new McDonalds Building,1797 Cope Avenue East Introduction Project Description Kathleen Hammer of Landform, on behalf of McDonald’s,is proposing the demolition and reconstructionof the McDonald’s Restaurant located at 1797 Cope Avenue East. The project is located ona 2.29-acre site which is currently used as aMcDonald’s Restaurant. Request The applicant is requesting cityapproval ofdesign reviewfor the new building and site improvements. Background June 6, 1974:Thedesign plans for the existing McDonald’s building were approved by the city council. December 3, 1979: The city approved plans for McDonalds to expand itsbuilding and add a drive upwindow. October 21, 1992:The city approved plans for McDonald’s to expand itsparking lot. Discussion Design Review Architectural Theproposedbuilding will be built with a combination offace brick and tile. Tempered glass windows will be present throughout the south and east elevations. Metal panels will be installed near the roof line of the buildings. The building is attractively designed and consistent with other newer McDonald’s buildings found throughout the metro region. Site Layout Access to the site is already established by the existing building and will remain consistent with the new building. Both access points are on Cope Avenue with the easterly access being a shared drive with the shopping center to the east. Currently,drive through traffic is routed near theexisting building. The revised site will route drive through traffic around the perimeter of the site which will improve pedestrian safety for people accessing the building from the parking lot. The new site plans meets all building and parking lot setbacks. In addition,a significant portion of the existing parking lot between the existing building and Highway 36 will be reclaimed and turned back to green space. This will reduce the site’s impervious surface by five percent. The engineering department is requesting the applicant add a small physical barrier between the start of the drive through lane and the parking lot nearthe south east corner of the site. This can be accomplished by extending the proposed planting area between the drive through land and parking spaces. A five-foot sidewalk along Cope Avenue is also required to be built. This is consistent with the city’s policy of requiring sidewalk segments be added as properties redevelop. Parking For restaurants, the city’s parking ordinance requires one parking space for every 50 square feet of area available for patron use –meaning 46spaces are required. The applicant is proposing to provide 80 total parking spaces –well exceeding the required amount. The site currently has 90 spaces,many of which go unused throughout the day. Landscaping There are 43 significant trees,equaling 336 diameter inches on the property. The applicant is removing 28 significant trees, equaling 302 diameter inches. The City’s tree replacement calculation requires the applicant replace 317 caliper inches of trees, or 158 trees –2 caliper inchtrees. The applicant’s planting plan includes 34 new trees, for a total of 154.5 caliper inches of trees. As allowed by city ordinance, the applicant is intending to pay into the city’s tree fundfor the inches unmitigated on site. In terms of the placement and variety of plantings on site, the proposed landscape plan is attractively designed and will enhance this overall look of this site. Lighting The applicant’s lighting plan meets ordinance requirements. Department Comments EngineeringDepartment, Jon Jarosch Please see Jon Jarosch’s engineering report, dated January 9, 2017, attached to this report. Building Official, Jason Brash Build per 2012 IBC, 2012 IMC, 2012 IFGC, 2014 NEC, 2012 Minnesota State Plumbing Code, 2015 Minnesota State Fire Code, MN 2015 Accessibility code, and 2015 Minnesota Building Code. Demonstrate compliance with all the requirements of the 2012 Minnesota Energy Code Chapter 1323 Section C401.2. Mixing 2012 IECC provisions and ASHRAE Standard 90.1 to obtain compliance is not an option. The following forms must be completed as submittals. a.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Building Envelope Compliance Documentation b.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 HVAC Compliance Documentation c.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Service Water Heating Compliance Documentation d.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Lighting Compliance Documentation Special inspections required as per 2012 IBC Chapter 17. Complete supporting special inspection schedule document and submit with plan review response. All kitchen equipment and plans must be NSF listed and meet all State of Minnesota Environmental Health requirements. If you have any questions contact Environmental Health Official Molly Wellens at 651-249-2308.Provide documents and submit plans to review before building permit can be issued. Plumbing plans shall be submitted to the State Plumbing Department for approval prior to the issuance of a plumbing permit.St Paul water requires permits for water piping Maplewood requires permit for drain waste and vent. Permits are required for building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, Health, fire alarm, and sprinklers. Fire Department, Fire Marshal Butch Gervais Maintain minimum 20-foot wide fire access road. Police Department, Chief Paul Schnell No issues Recommendations A.Approve the design plans date-stamped December 23, 2016, for the new McDonald’s building located at 1797 Cope Avenue East. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: 1.Approval of design plans is good for two years. If the applicant has notbegun construction within two years, this design review shall be repeated. Staff may approve minor changes to these plans. 2.The applicant shall comply with the conditions noted in the engineering report by Jon Jarosch dated January 9, 2017. 3.The applicantshall comply with the conditions noted in the environmentalreport by Shann FinwalldatedJanuary 9, 2017. 4.Submit to staffcopiesof the executed agreementsfor cross-access between the applicantand the property owner of 2303 White Bear Avenue North. 5.Submit to staff a revised landscape plan showing additional trees to meet the city’s tree preservation requirements or prior to receiving a building permit,submit the required fee for the city’s tree fund to meet the tree preservation requirements. 6.Theapplicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit or cash escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of installing the landscaping before getting a building permit. Reference Information Site Description Site Size:2.29Acres Existing Land Use: McDonald’s Surrounding Land Uses North: MN Highway 36 South: Gas station East:Multi-tenant shopping center West:Office building Planning Existing Land Use:Commercial (C) Existing Zoning:Light Manufacturing(M1) Application Date The city deemed the applicant’sapplications complete onDecember 23, 2016. The 60-day review deadline for a decision is February 21, 2017. As stated in State Statute 15.99, the city is allowed to take an additional 60 days if necessaryto complete the review of the application. Attachments 1.Location Map 2.Site Plan 3.Landscape Plan 4.Building Elevations 5.Applicant’s Narrative 6.Jon Jarosch, engineering comments, dated January 9, 2017 7.Shann Finwall,environmentalcomments, dated January 9, 2017 8.Applicant’s plan set (separate attachment) Attachment 1 accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and Attachment 2 c LANDFORM2016 19 McDONALD'S FFE = 920.50 2AC2AC 3 3 1 NO NO G PARKIN PARKING 13 14 14 9 02040 NORTH ZONING AND SETBACK SUMMARY SITE CONSTRUCTION NOTES PARKING SUMMARY SITE PLAN NOTES AREA SUMMARY Landform and Site to Finishare registered service marks of Landform Professi ® ® onal Services, LLC. PROJECT NO.FILE NAME: C2.1 C201MCD312.DWG MCD16312 Attachment 3 c LANDFORM2016 McDONALD'SMcDONALD'S FFE = 920.50FFE = 920.50 NNOO NNOO PPAARRKKIINNGG GG PPAARRKKIINN PERENNIALS & ORNAMENTAL GRASSESCONIFEROUS SHRUBSDECIDUOUS SHRUBSCONIFEROUS TREESDECIDUOUS TREES KEYCOUNT KEYCOUNTKEYCOUNTKEYCOUNTKEYCOUNT LEGEND SCIENTIFIC NAMESCIENTIFIC NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME SCIENTIFIC NAMESCIENTIFIC NAME 02040 NORTH COMMON NAMECOMMON NAME COMMON NAME COMMON NAME COMMON NAME MATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND.MATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND. MATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND. MATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND.MATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND. LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS LANDSCAPE NOTES GENERAL NOTES Landform and Site to Finishare registered service marks of Landform Professi ® ® onal Services, LLC. PROJECT NO.FILE NAME: L2.1 L201MCD312.DWG MCD16312 Attachment 4 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 INTRODUCTION On behalf of McDonald’s,Landform is pleased to submit this application forCommunity Design Review to allow demolition and reconstruction of a McDonald’s Restaurant located at 1797Cope Avenue East. The site is a 2.29-acre site and is currently used asMcDonald’s Restaurant.Ourredevelopment planincludes complete demolitionand reconstruction of the building and the parking lot. Weare excited about the improvements proposed for this site. SITEPLAN Parking Section 44-17 of the Maplewood Zoning Code requires 1parking space for every50 square feet of floor spacedevoted to patron use. The proposed building includes 2,280square feet of space used for patron use, whichrequires 46 parking spaces. The site plan meets this requirement. The parking stalls are designed at a90-degreeangle and 24-foot wide two-way drive aisles on the east side of the building and a 22-foot wide one-way drive aisle on the west of the building provide adequate circulation. The Zoning Code requires parking stalls for this restaurant to be 10 feet by 18 feet as shown on the plans. Setbacks All setback requirements are met and dimensioned on the plan. Section 44-20 of the Maplewood Zoning Code requires a parking lot setback of 15feet from any street right-of-way and a 5-foot setback from all other property lines. A building setback of 30 feet from street right-of-way is also shown as required. Tree Mitigationand Landscaping Section 18-207 of the Maplewood Environment Ordinance requires replacement of trees if more than 20% of significanttrees are removed. The redevelopment will preserve 302 of 640 inches of significant trees (47% preservation).According to the treemitigation replacement schedule317inches of new treeis requiredfor the 302 inches being removed. The landscaping plan provides 162.5 inchesof new plant material; 32 deciduous trees, 2 coniferous trees, 170 deciduous shrubs, 7 coniferous shrubs and 115 perennials and ornamental grasses. We are confident the mitigation inches shown on the plans will meet the intent of the landscaping and screening requirements. The plan shows 154.5 mitigation inches unplanted and we are requesting to pay fee in lieu of plantings for the 154.5 mitigation inches required, as allowed by Section 18-207. A large portion of theshrubswill be planted in the rain garden shownto the northof the building.The rain garden is proposed to assist in stormwater management of the site as well as provide aesthetics.The required landscapedyardsare provided from Cope Avenue. MCD160312 – Maplewood, MinnesotaDecember 21, 2016 Project Narrative2 Attachment 5 Screening The existing trees on the east lot line and the proposed newplantings on the west lot line will provide adequate screening of car headlights from adjacent commercial properties as required by Section 44-19 of the Maplewood Zoning Ordinance. Lighting The proposed outdoor lighting complieswith Section 44-20 of theMaplewood Zoning Ordinance. The proposed outdoor lighting do not exceed 0.4 footcandles of light intensity at the property lines. SUMMARY We respectfully request approval of the Community Design Review to allow demolition of the existing McDonald’s Restaurant at1797 Cope Avenue Eastandconstruction of a new McDonald’s Restaurant on the site. CONTACT INFORMATION This document was prepared by: Kathleen Hammer Landform 105 South Fifth Street, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Any additional questions regarding this application can be directed to Kathleen Hammerat or 612.638.0228. khammer@landform.net MCD160312 – Maplewood, MinnesotaDecember 21, 2016 Project Narrative3 Attachment 6 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: McDonalds Rebuild – 1797 Cope Avenue East PROJECT NO: 16-38 COMMENTS BY: Jon Jarosch, P.E. – Staff Engineer DATE: 1-9-2017 REPORTS: Stormwater Management Report Dated 12-14-2016 PLAN SET: Plans Dated 12-21-2016 Theapplicant is proposing todemolish the existing McDonalds Restaurant building and site at 1797 Cope Avenue East and construct a new building and site amenities.The applicant is requesting a review of the current design. As theamount of disturbance on this site is greater than 0.5 acre, the applicantis requiredto meet the City’s stormwater quality, rate control, and other stormwater management requirements.From the stormwater management report and calculations submitted, the proposed development meets the City’s stormwater management requirements. This review does not constitute a final review of the plans, as the applicant will need to submit construction documents for final review.Thefollowing are engineeringreview comments on the design and act as conditions prior to issuing permits. Drainage and Stormwater Management 1)The project shall be submitted to the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) for review. All conditions oftheRWMWD shall be met. Permit coverage from theRWMWD is required prior to the issuance of a City grading permit. 2) Pre-treatment devices shall be installed upstream of the proposed infiltration basin. Sumped manholesshall be 3-feet or greater in depthif utilized as a pre-treatment device. 3)Site runoff is channeled along the parking lot via a bituminous swale at a 1% grade. There is a potential for ice buildup due to the flat nature of this swale. The applicant shall review this drainage method and make changes as appropriate. 4)The project directs runoff onto MnDOT right-of-way, as it does today. The project shall be reviewed by MnDOT for impacts to their right-of-way. All requirements of MnDOT shall be met. Attachment 6 Grading and Erosion Control 5)Emergency overflows for the proposed infiltration basin shall contain adequate stabilization and armoring to prevent scour during overflow conditions. 6)Inlet protection devices shall be installed on allexistingand proposedonsite storm seweruntil all exposed soils onsite are stabilized.This includes storm sewer on adjacent streets that could potentially receive construction related sedimentor debris. 7)Adjacent streetsand parking areasshall be swept as needed to keep the pavement clear ofsediment and construction debris. 8)All pedestrian facilities shall be ADA compliant. 9)A copy of the project SWPPP and NDPES Permit shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Site layout and TrafficFlow 10)A 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk shall be installed along the properties Cope Avenue frontage. 11)The proposed easterly entrance drive does not line up with the parking lot drive aisle and directs vehicles into parking spots with no barrier (curb). The applicant shall revise this area to better define driver expectations and protect parked vehicles (install a curbed median and signage for example). Sanitary Sewer and Water Service 12)The applicant shall be responsible for paying any SAC, WAC, or PAC charges related to the improvements proposed with this project.A SAC determination is required prior to the issuance of permits. 13)The applicant shall provide design information for the proposed sanitary sewer and water services including invert elevations. 14)The project shall be reviewed by Saint Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS). All conditions of SPRWS shall be met. Public Works Permits The following permits are required by the Maplewood Public Works Department for this project. The applicant should verify the need for other City permits with the Building Department. Attachment 6 15)Grading and erosion control permit 16)Parking lot permit 17)Sanitary Sewer Service Permit 18)Storm Sewer Permit -END COMMENTS - Attachment 7 Environmental Review Project: McDonald’s Remodel Dateof Plans:December 12, 2016 Date of Review: January 9, 2017 Location:1797 Cope Avenue Reviewer:Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner (651) 249-2304;shann.finwall@maplewoodmn.gov Virginia Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator (651) 249-2416;virginia.gaynor@maplewoodmn.gov Project Background Landform Professional Services, on behalfof McDonald’s is requesting approval to tear down the existing McDonald’s Restaurant building and build a new McDonald’s Restaurant in its place. There are several significant trees on the property. The applicant proposes to install aninfiltration basin with native plantings. The applicant must comply with the City’s wetland and tree preservation ordinancesand native seeding/planting policy. 1.Trees a.Tree Preservation Ordinance: Maplewood’s tree preservation ordinance describes a significant tree as a hardwood tree with a minimum of 6 inches in diameter, an evergreen tree with a minimum of 8 inches in diameter, and a softwood tree with a minimum of 12 inches in diameter. A specimen tree is defined as a healthy tree of any species which is 28 inches in diameter or greater. The ordinance requires any significant or specimen tree removed to be replaced based on a tree mitigation calculation. The calculation takes into account the size of a tree and bases replacement on that size. The calculation also allows credits to the final tree replacement amount for preserving specimen trees. b.Tree Impacts:There are 43 significant trees equaling, 336 diameter incheson the property. The applicant is removing 28significant trees, equaling 302 diameter inches. The City’s tree replacement calculation requires the applicant replace 317caliper inches of trees, or 158 trees – 2 caliper inch trees.The applicant’s planting plan includes 34 new trees, for a total of 154.5 caliper inches of trees. c.Tree Preservation Recommendations: 1. Submit a revised planting plan which shows an additional 154.5 caliper inches of trees. This replacement should be shown on the plan. 2.Alternatively, the City’s tree standards allows an applicant to pay into the City’s tree fund for trees that cannot be planted on site. The cost is $60 per caliper inch that cannot be planted on site, or in this case a payment of $9,264(154.4 x $60). 1 Attachment 7 3.Submit a tree preservation plan which shows how the trees scheduled to be preserved will be protected during development per the City’s tree standards. 4.The applicant shall submit a cash escrow or letter of credit to cover 150% of the tree replacement requirements. 2. Infiltration BasinPlanting a.Shrub Plantings:The shrub plantings for the infiltration basin are approved. b.Seed Mix:The applicant shall indicate what seed mix is beingused for the seeding adjacent tothe infiltration basin.If a native seed mix will be used, the landscaping notes shall indicate: 1.Type of native seed mix. 2.Whether cover crop will be used. 3.Whether erosion control blanket will be used on slope. 4.That a specialized native seeding contractor will be used. 5.Applicant must provide information on maintenance activities that will take place during the three-year establishment period (planting year plus two full growing seasons). This maintenance typically includes mowing two to three times year one and two, andspot treatment of weeds such as thistle years two and three. 6.Applicant must provide information on who willtake responsibility of maintenance (developer, owner, etc.) during the three-year establishment period. Note: The native seedings are rarely successful unless done by a specialized native seeding contractor (i.e.,a prairie restoration company), andtypically require three years to establish.The city does notsign off on native seedings (release escrow or letter of credit) when the cover crop establishes, it waits until it is clear the nativeplants have established. On native seeding projects it is strongly recommended that the applicant contracts with a specialized native contractor for maintenance during the two-three year establishment period. 2 MEMORANDUM TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator DATE:November 21, 2016 SUBJECT:Consider ApprovalofNew Buildings at Maple Ridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue 1.Design Review 2.Comprehensive Sign PlanAmendment Introduction Project Description Starpoint Propertiesis proposing to build two newbuildings on the east side of its property at 2515 White Bear Avenue. This is the site of the Maple Ridge Shopping Center which includes a Rainbow Foods grocery store and several smaller stores and restaurants located on the west side of the site. This project was initially reviewed by the community design review board (CDRB) on November 15, 2016 and the city council on November 28, 2016. The city council tabled its review and requested the applicant work to revise its proposal and that the CDRB review the project again before it goes back to the city council. Requests The applicant is requesting city approval for design reviewand a comprehensive sign plan amendment.The applicant had requested consideration for a parking waiver but has since revised its plans to meet city code parking requirements. Background July 9, 1985: The CDRB approved the design plan review for the Maple Ridge Center at 2515 White Bear Avenue. The design plans included a 108,706 square foot retail shopping center and Rainbow Foods grocery store. The two buildings were approved with exteriors of eight-inch square-pattern burnished and rock face concrete masonry units (CMU) with a prefinished metal seam canopy. March 25, 1986: The CDRB approved the comprehensive sign plan for the Maple Ridge Center. August 9, 2006: The CDRB approved design plans for the exterior remodeling of the center including upgrades to the façade with new brick, EIFS, glass and the solid-colored awnings. Discussion Design Review Architectural The applicant’s original submittal showed the two proposed buildings as being constructed largely with concrete blocks. Staff had indicated this would not be acceptable and had recommended the building elevations be resubmitted for CDRB review. The revised plans now show the two buildings being constructed with a mix of brick, stucco and fiber cement panels. Staff had also indicated concerns regarding the elevations facing White Bear Avenue and the applicant has also taken steps to improve the design of those elevations. The applicant has also indicated in their letter they plan to resurface the poor areas of the parking lot. Staff had previously included the resurfacing of the parking lot as a condition of approval. Site Plan Setbacks and Site Access Theproposednew buildings will be setback at least 30 feet from the front property line. The parking lot and drives will be setback at least 15 feet from the front property line. No new access points will be added as a result ofthis project. The main access from White Bear Avenue will remain in place as does the shared access to the neighboring property to the north.Ramsey County is also requiring the applicant add a right turn lane into the site for traffic traveling southbound on White Bear Avenue. Given the CDRB’s stated concerns regarding the overall site plan and parking waiver, the applicant revised its site plan to add 24 more parking spaces to the site plan. These additional 24 parking spaces, along with 72 proof-of-parking spaces, eliminates the need for a parking waiver. To add these spaces back into the site, the applicant eliminated a green space near the south building and reduced the width of the proposed drive through around the building. As described in the applicant’s letter, the site plan has been revised to: “…address the concerns of the city. The most substantial change gives the north lot drive thru as much room as possible. The entry for the parking lot has been narrowed to an appropriate width to accommodate one-way traffic. This will slow cars down and relieve confusion by providing one lane for each direction of traffic. The entrance has also been shifted to the south to distance the north drive thru entrance from the parking entrance while aligning with the parking aisles.” The access off White Bear Avenue is proposed to be slimmed down which shifts the entry south of the existing entry. That additional spaceprovides a larger bufferbetween the proposed building to the north and the entry access point. See the images on the next page to compare the original and revised site plans. A full sized sign plan has also been included in the agenda packet. Original Revised submitted site submitted site plan plan Internal Circulation Consistent with the previous reviewed plans, the circulation on the east side of the site does change with the addition of the two new buildings and the city’s engineering department is requiring more information from the applicant to ensure delivery and emergency service vehicles will be able to navigate these areas. In addition, the city’s engineering department would like the entrance area to the site to be better defined by adding a T-style intersection (or equivalent) to assist withdriver expectations.The ingress off of White Bear Avenue shall be a free flowing condition to ensure backups do not occur out onto White Bear Avenue. The applicant shall provide a sign and/or pavement marking plan that details how the ‘intersection’ where the entrance driveoff of White Bear Avenue connects with the parking lot drive aisles is to be navigated. Revising the site plan to accommodate the T-style intersection shall be approved by the city engineer. While the area of the new building on the north side of the site appears to be tight, all city site design requirements are being met.Given the lack of significant amount of traffic flow between this site and the neighboring property to the north, staff is not concerned with the site design of this area. With thatsaid, staff recommends as a condition of approval that traffic calming measuresbe installed if the north access point becomes a safety issue. Landscaping The site iscurrently largely voidof any landscaping other than the boulevard area along White Bear Avenueand three trees on the northeast corner of the site. With this proposed project, the applicant would be adding 21 deciduous trees and 15coniferoustrees throughout the site includingnew parking lot islands at the end of each parking bay. In addition to the trees, more than 200 shrubs, perennials and grasses will be planted near the two new buildings. The proposed landscaping will be an improvement to the overall site. Parking Based on city code, the current site and uses requires541 parking spaces. There are currently 611 parking spaces on site. The two new proposed buildings would add 67 more required spaces for a total of 608 spaces. When considering the applicant’s revised site plan and if the two new buildings are built there would be 536spaces available overall on site. This is a reduction of 5spaces from current conditions and would leave the applicant 72spaces short of meeting code requirements. The applicant is proposing to provide 72 proof-of-parking spaces in the area west of the existing buildingsthat could be added if needed. The applicant is requesting to not install these proof-of-parking spaces until there is a demonstrated demand. Currently, parking demand tends to be focused in the spaces on the north side of the site near the existing restaurants. If you are familiar with the property you will have seen that much of the parking lot goes unused. Staff did counts of open spaces on two recent weekdays, when the weather was nice, over the noon hour assuming that would be a peak use time for the center. Each day staff found more than 350 spaces open and available for parking. It is also assumed that the mix of commercial and retail uses on this site have slightly differing peak demand times meaning that it is possible for the users to be sharing parking stalls. Staff is comfortable with the use of the 72 proof-of-parking spaces as requested by the applicant. Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment There is an existing comprehensive sign plan for this site which regulates the size and placement of wall signs for the tenants of the shopping center. The sign plan states the grocery store building needs to abide bythe city’s signordinance requirements. The applicant is requesting each tenant be allowed two wall signs for each tenant. Staff feels this request is reasonable based on the orientation of the buildings and will help add features to the east elevations of the buildings. Staff would recommend the signs be limited to the east and west elevations of each building and the size of each sign be limited to the city’s sign ordinance requirements. Department Comments Engineering Please see Jon Jarosch’s engineering report, dated January 9, 2017, attached to this report. Building Official, Jason Brash Build per 2012 IBC, 2012 IMC, 2012 IFGC, 2014 NEC, 2012 Minnesota State Plumbing Code, 2015 Minnesota State Fire Code, MN 2015 Accessibility code, and 2015 Minnesota Building Code. Demonstrate compliance with all the requirements of the 2012 Minnesota Energy Code Chapter 1323 Section C401.2. Mixing 2012 IECC provisions and ASHRAE Standard 90.1 to obtain compliance is not an option. The following forms must be completed as submittals. a.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Building Envelope Compliance Documentation b.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 HVAC Compliance Documentation c.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Service Water Heating Compliance Documentation d.ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Lighting Compliance Documentation Special inspections required as per 2012 IBC Chapter 17. Complete supporting special inspection schedule document and submit with plan review response. All kitchen equipment and plans must be NSF listed and meet all State of Minnesota Environmental Health requirements. If you have any questions contact Environmental Health Official Molly Wellens at 651-249-2308.Provide documents and submit plans to review before building permit can be issued. Plumbing plans shall be submitted tothe State Plumbing Department for approval prior to the issuance of a plumbing permit.St Paul water requires permits for water piping Maplewood requires permit for drain waste and vent. Permits are required for building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, Health, fire alarm, and sprinklers. Parks Department, Jim Taylor PAC charge for 2016 Development PAC X 9% $46,088 Creditfor previous payment $5,743 Total Due $40,345 Commission Review November 15, 2016:The community design review board reviewed this project and recommended approval but on the condition that the northerly proposed building be eliminated due to issues and concerns related to parking availability for the entire site and the overall design of the site plan. Traffic circulation for the proposed site plan in relation to the neighboring site was also cited as a concern.The CDRB also recommended the building elevations for the southerly building be brought back for review and approval to ensure the reduction of the amount of proposed concrete block and appearance of the east elevation facing White Bear Avenue. Budget Impact None. Recommendations A.Approve the revised plans date-stamped December 23, 2016, for Starpoint Properties’ proposal to build two new buildings at the Maple Ridge Center,2515 White Bear Avenue. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: 1.This approval is good for two years. After two years, the design-reviewprocess shall be repeated if the developer has not begun construction. 2.If a parking shortage developed on this site, the property owner will be required to install the72 proof-of-parking spaces as proposed by the applicant. 3.All requirements of the fire marshal and building official must be met. 4.Maintain drive aisles of at least 24 feet in width. 5.The applicants shall comply with all requirements of the MaplewoodEngineering Report from Jon Jarosch dated January 9, 2017. 6.The applicants shall provide the city with cash escrow or an irrevocable letter ofcredit for 150 percent of the proposed exterior landscaping and site improvements prior to getting abuilding permit for the development. 7.Before any certificates of occupancy are issued for the new buildings, the property ownershall repair or replace all potholes and other substandard sections of the existing parking lot. 8.The applicant shall place all trash containers in enclosures and ensure the west side of the lot iskept clear of debris and trash. 9.If deemed necessary by the city engineer, traffic calming measures must be installed near or at the north shared access point with 2525 White Bear Avenue. The city engineer may also require this access point be closed if deemed necessary. 10.All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of environmental andeconomic development may approve minor changes. B.Approve thecomprehensive sign plan amendment to allow signage for new standalone buildings at the Maple Ridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue. Approval of the comprehensive sign plan amendment is subject to the following conditions: 1.The existing shopping center and grocery store buildings will continue to be regulatedby previous comprehensive sign plan approvals. No changes to signage requirements for those two buildings are approved. 2.Each tenant of the two new buildings will be allowed two wall signs. 3.The location of wall signs is limited to the east and west elevations of the buildings, with a tenant allowed up to one sign per elevation. 4.Eachwall sign shall be comprised of individual channel letters. Cabinet signs are prohibited. 5.The size of each wall sign must comply with the city’s sign ordinance requirements. Citizen Comments Staff surveyed the 18surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the proposed site for their opinion about this proposal. Staff received 2responses which are included below. I think this will bring more traffic to this area. Half of the lot is always empty anyway. Rainbow got very slow after Cub took it over and I think with new buildings and new tenants this should a good fit as long as it willbe in front of the Rainbow area. (Maplewood Tobacco and Cigar, 2515 White Bear Ave, Suite A17) On the behalf of the property owners of 2525 White Bear Ave/Maplewood Place we are good with the proposed redevelopment as long as the two-way drive lane / easement access is maintained.It appears that the proposed parking and curb cut would reduce the size and flow of the existing two way access which is a big concern. As you know we are planning on redeveloping 2525 White Bear Ave property in the next 3years to retail up front/towards White Bear and medical and professional in the back half. We would like to see a more detailed site plan of proposed redevelopment overlaid over the existing site plan before we can be 100% behind it. In the meantime, we have asked and pointed out to the management of Mapleridge Center about the unsafe parking lot surface that is riddled with pot holes up to 3 feet wide and over 12" deep that has and will continue to destroy the front ends of vehicles big and small.We are asking if you have any leverage to have them immediately repair the pot holes for the safety and concern of the patrons of both centers. Thanks for sending out this email with the link to this project.(Marty Tuner, Property Manager of 2525 White Bear Avenue, property directly to the north) Reference Information Site Description Site Size:12.83Acres Existing Land Use: Shopping Center Surrounding Land Uses North: Auto mall South: Church East:White Bear Avenue and commercial uses West:Senior housing and Ramsey County Open Space Planning Existing Land Use:Commercial Existing Zoning:Business Commercial(BC) Application Date The city deemed the applicant’s applications complete on November 7, 2016. The initial 60-day review deadline for a decision wasJanuary 6, 2017. As stated in Minnesota State Statute 15.99, the city is allowed to take an additional 60 days if necessary in order to complete the review of the application. The city has extended the review period and the new deadline is now March 7, 2017. Attachments 1.Overview Map 2.Land Use Map 3.Zoning Map 4.Applicant’s Letterdated December 23, 2016 5.Applicant’s Revised Site Plan 6.Applicant’s Revised Building Elevations 7.Jon Jarosch, Engineering comments, dated January 9, 2017 8.Applicant’s Plan Set (separate attachment) Attachment 1 accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and Feet 600.0 300.00 0 600.0 Attachment 2 Maplewood, City of Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, 2515 White Bear Avenue - Maple Ridge Shopping Center Legend Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and Institution Land Use Map Commercial the GIS user community Government Open Space High Density Residential Attachment 3 Maplewood, City of Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community,Legend 2515 White Bear Avenue - Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and Business Commercial (bc) Maple Ridge Shopping Center the GIS user community Farm (f) Limited Business Commercial (lbc) Zoning Map Single Dwelling (r1) Planned Unit Development (pud) Attachment 4 December 27, 2016 Jeff Schuler 275 Market Street, Suite 368 Minneapolis, MN 55405 Starpoint Properties currently owns the Mapleridge Center at 2515 White Bear Ave in Maplewood. A shopping center housing various retail and restaurant tenants currently occupies the site. The shopping center has been consistently well occupied since its inception and is an important part of Maplewood’s retail market. We propose to add to the success of the shopping center by increasing the current offerings of the site. To do this we plan to create two new outlots that will be suitable for retail or restaurant buildings. Since our last meeting with the community design review board, we have made changes to the site plan to address the concerns of the city. The most substantial change gives the north lot drive thru as much room as possible. The entry for the parking lot has been narrowed to an appropriate width to accomodate one-way traffic. This will slow cars down and relieve confusion by providing one lane for each direction of traffic. The entrance has also been shifted to the south to distance the north drive thru entrance from the parking entrance while aligning with the parking aisles. The first lot is to be located at the northeast corner of the property. This building (referred to as lot 1) is projected to be an approximately 2,500 sqft restaurant with the potential for drive-thru service. The location of this lot will extend the visual impact of the current building to the street. By locating this lot in the northeast corner, it will define the entry from White Bear Ave into the current parking lot. We have also addressed concerns related to the design of the buildings. The previous iteration was planned to match the existing mall. In response to the displeasure with that idea, we have designed a concept with towers and more windows facing White Bear Ave. to create a more pleasant front for Maplewood’s main street. To the south of lot 1 we are proposing a second building on the opposite side of the White Bear Ave. entrance. This second proposed outlot will accommodate a potential 5,000 sqft building with the option for drive-thru service. The currently planned tenant would not need a drive thru, therefore it has been dashed in and additional parking is shown as it would be built now. This lot will be located in the underutilized portion of the current parking lot. This location minimizes the impact of new development by not disturbing a large portion of existing pervious surface. The location of this building will frame the other side of the parking lot entrance to the shopping center. This building will bring the shopping center to the street and deemphasize the large parking area that is currently in front of the shopping center. By providing more density, this project will make the property more attractive, vibrant and enhance the overall property value. We will resurface the worn areas of the lot as well as enliven the expansive asphalt surface with green parking islands and trees. These islands will increase the flow and safety of the lot by slowing people down with landscape and directing vehicle traffic in a predictable corridor. A bus shelter on White Bear Avenue for patrons benefits the site as well. The proposed outlots will project increased visual interest to this bus stop that serves two different Metro Transit routes. Firm Ground Architects & Engineers Inc. 612.819.1835 275 Market Street, Suite 368 info@firmgroundae.com Minneapolis, Minnesota 55405www.firmgroundae.com | Follow us on Attachment 5 6 4 1 I NTERNATIONAL MARKET S 275 MARKET STREET SUITE 36 M INNEAP O LIS, MN 55405 Q UAR 8 E Attachment 6 BUILDING 1 MAPLERIDGE CENTER BUILDING 2 Attachment 6 Attachment 6 Attachment 7 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: 2515 White Bear Avenue PROJECT NO: 16-33 COMMENTS BY: Jon Jarosch, P.E. – Staff Engineer DATE: 1-9-2017 PLAN SET: 12-23-2016 Submittal Theapplicant is proposing to construct two new buildings on the east side of the 2515 White Bear Avenue property.The applicant is requesting a review of the current design. As theamount of disturbance on this site is greater than 0.5 acre, the applicantis requiredto meet the City’s stormwater quality, rate control, and other stormwater management requirements.The applicant is proposing to meet these requirements via the use of an underground infiltration system. This review does not constitute a final review of the plans, as the applicant will need to submit construction documents for final review.Thefollowing are engineeringreview comments on the design and act as conditions prior to issuing permits. Drainage and Stormwater Management 1)The project shall be submitted to the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) for review. All conditions oftheRWMWD shall be met.Permit coverage from theRWMWD is required prior to the issuance of a City grading permit. 2) Pre-treatment devices shall be installed upstream of all onsite water quality features including the underground infiltration system. Sumped manholesshall be 3-feet or greater in depth. 3)High water level for the proposed infiltrationsystemshall be shown on the grading plan. 4)The applicant shall submit a stormwatermanagement plan detailing how their plan meets the City’s requirements. 5)The applicant shall submit geotechnical information (soil borings) supporting infiltration rates utilized for the stormwater management plan. 6)The applicant shall submit design details for the underground infiltration system. Attachment 7 Grading and Erosion Control 7)The applicant shall provide an erosion control plan. 8)Perimeter control measures shall be installed to contain eroded materials within the site. 9)All slopesshall be 3H:1Vor flatter. 10)Inlet protection devices shall be installed on allexistingand proposedonsite storm seweruntil all exposed soils onsite are stabilized.This includes storm sewer on adjacent streets that could potentially receive construction related sedimentor debris. 11)Adjacent streetsand parking areasshall be swept as needed to keep the pavement clear of sediment and construction debris. 12)All pedestrian facilities shall be ADA compliant. 13)A copy of the project SWPPP and NDPES Permit shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Site layout and TrafficFlow 14)The southerly of the two proposed buildings lies within an existing utility easement, as well as over an existing water service line that serves the remainder of the site.The applicant shall review this situation and make changes as necessary. 15)The exit of the proposed drive-thru at the northern property line may encourage vehicular traffic to exit right onto the adjacent property to the north for which access is currentlyopen.Cross-access agreements shall be provided to the City detailing the rights and responsibilities between the adjacent parcels if the connection to the property to the north remains. 16)Construction is proposed on the property to the north. The applicant shall provide a copy of written authorization and consent to perform work on the neighboring propertyprior to the issuance of city permits to begin work. 17)The intersection at theingress/egress driveway atWhite Bear Avenue and the parking lot drive aisle create a confusing intersection. This intersection shall be revised to a T- style intersection (or equivalent) to better define driver expectations.This will require cutting off access to the parking aisles at the west side of the intersection (installing curbed median) and placing stop signs on the north and south approaches. The ingress off of White Bear Avenue shall be a free flowing condition to ensure backups do not occur out onto White Bear Avenue. The applicant shall provide a sign and/or pavement marking plan that details how the ‘intersection’ where the entrance drive off of White Attachment 7 Bear Avenue connects with the parking lot drive aisles is to be navigated. This area will be confusing to drivers without proper signage. 18)The applicant shall provide turning movement diagrams for the drive aisle ‘intersection’ just west of the entrance off of White Bear Avenue, as well as at the connection to the property to the north. The diagrams should depict how delivery vehicles and emergency service vehicles will navigate these areas. 19)Ramsey County is requesting a right turn lane be installed on White Bear Avenue at the ingress/egress driveway. Refer to Ramsey County Comments. The Developer will be required to enter into a Development Agreement with the City to ensure the construction of the right turn lane. Sanitary Sewer and Water Service 20)The applicant shall be responsible for paying any SAC, WAC, or PAC charges related to the improvements proposed with this project.A SAC determination is required prior to the issuance of permits. 21)The applicant shall provide design information for the proposed sanitary sewer and water services including pipe size and invert elevations. 22)The applicant shall meet all requirements of Saint Paul Regional Water Services as noted below. a.If the new water services are intended to be combination fire and domestic water services, they ratio of fire to domestic water must be no less than 4:1. b.Provide the following on Plan Sheet C4.0: Show the size and material type of the water services. c.Ratio of fire suppression to domestic takeoff must be no less than 4:1. d.Plumbing permit applications to be made with SPRWS at 1900 Rice Street, Saint Paul, MN. e.Before construction of a new water service can be scheduled, SPRWS must receive a Water Service Contract signed by the owner and all required payments. f.Provide completed project data sheets to determine meter sizing. g.Furnish one set of interior fire suppression mechanical plans for review and approval by SPRWS plumbing inspection unit. i.Furnish one set of revised site plans for review. Following approval by SPRWS, furnish one set of approved plans. Attachment 7 Ramsey County Comments 23)Due to the significant traffic generated by this site, which will only increase via this proposed development,Ramsey County is requesting the construction ofa right turn lane on White Bear Avenueat the entrancelocation. 24)The construction limits on the utility plans shall be revised to include the utility connections within White Bear Avenue. Details shall also be included for the replacement of the pavement on White Bear Avenue. 25)A right of way permit will be required for any construction activity occurring within the County’s right of way. Please contact Doug Heidemann at 651-266-7186 or douglas.heidemann@co.ramsey.mn.usto discuss permit requirements. Public Works Permits The following permits are required by the Maplewood Public Works Department for this project. The applicant should verify the need for other City permits with the Building Department. 26)The developer shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City. 27)Grading and erosion control permit 28)Sanitary Sewer Service Permit 29)Storm Sewer Permit -END COMMENTS - MEMORANDUM TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM:Chris Swanson,Environmental and City Code Specialist DATE:January 10, 2017 SUBJECT:2016Code Enforcement Year-End Report Introduction Property maintenance codes exist to prevent blight, maintain a residential atmosphere, and promote safe and healthful neighborhoods. Code Enforcement responds to a number of issues relating to vehicles, long grass/weeds, junk and debris, exterior storage, exterior property maintenance, home occupations, lighting, signs and other code related issues. Discussion Code enforcement complaints and abatements have continued to decline over the past few years as the number of foreclosedproperties has decreased. There was a small increase in the number of violations in the past yearsbut most of those have been in response to smaller issues. We are no longer seeing the large full yardencompassing or abandoned homeissues of the past. There are still a few properties that have more substantial violations but staff is working with those homeowners to address those violations on a set schedule. In 2016 staff responded to a large number ofstandardof livingtype of issues. These include hoarder, sanitary, and housing maintenancesituations. These typesof issues tend to take more time than a normal code violation and requirea more goal oriented approach. The city has relied on the County to provide mental health, transitional housing,and abatement support for many of these issues. Since 2014,the Code Enforcement Department has been working closely with the Maplewood Police Department to foster a more united response to community issues. Many of these recent standardof living situations have come from reports sent by the police or Fire/EMS after they have responded to an emergency situation. This partnership has been very helpful in providing support to both the code enforcement team and the residents who may need some help with their current living situation. Code staff believes that the number of violations will continue to stay stable in the next few years as most of the formerly vacant homes are now occupied and a large number of the previous problem properties have switched owners. Enforcement Matters Resolved Number of Complaints Resolved315 Enforcement Action in Progress13(most with compliance dates in 2017) Total Number ofCode Violations Received500 Correction letters/Citations/Abatements Number of Correction Letters mailed236 (down 14%from 2015) Number of Citations Issued 1 Abatement FeesCharged $4891.15 Re-inspection Fees Charged$375 Type of ComplaintNumber of Complaints Received Pending Exterior Storage 98 11 Unapproved Parking 530 Lawn Maintenance 740 House / Property Maintenance 152 Junk Vehicles 440 Trash / Garbage 10 Trash Container Storage 80 Commercial Vehicle / Equipment 20 Home Occupation 10 Miscellaneous Concerns* 320 Total Number of Violations32813 *Animal complaints fall under “Miscellaneous Concerns”. 2 Code Enforcement 100 Animal Commercial vehicle / equipment 80 Exterior Storage Home Occupation 60 House / Property Maintenance Junk Vehicle 40 Lawn Maintenance Trash / Garbage 20 Trash Container Storage Unapproved Parking 0 Type of Violation Code Enforcement Count by Year Issue 2010 2011 201220132014 2015 2016 Total Commercial vehicle / equipment 1518 14 1 3 42 57 Exterior Storage102 103 97 95 86 98 98 679 Home Occupation 1523 17 10 10 11 77 House / Property Maintenance5438 55 39 37 19 15 257 Junk Vehicle 111 80 67 35 37 51 44 425 Lawn Maintenance 235 196 13412841 43 74 851 Trash / Garbage 3550 35 27 18 81 174 Trash Container Storage 1523 21 16 10 23 8 116 Unapproved Parking124 123 12360 50 62 53 595 Misc. Complaints 8282 82 91 40 22 32 431 Total 788 736 645502332 331 328 3662 Summary The number of foreclosed and abandoned properties in Maplewoodhas substantially decreased over the past few years. Thishas caused a significant drop in the number of code violations and abatements. Code Enforcement continues to work through a community outreach model with a focuson educating violators and including stakeholders like landlords, residents, renters, and commercial 3 property owners. This approach helps the community understand what is expected for property upkeep. Code Enforcement will continue to work to keepMaplewood clean, safe, and attractive for the residents in the community. Budget Impact Code Enforcement is planned and budgeted through the General Fund. Recommendation Review the information provided in the report. Attachments None 4