HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-03-21 CDRB Packet
AGENDA
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Tuesday,March21, 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.January 17, 2017
5.Design Review:
a.Consider Approval of Design Review, LivINN Suites,285Century Avenue North
b.Consider Approval of Design Review, 3M Parking Ramp –B229,3M Campus
c.Consider Approval of Design Review, Phase 2 of Frost-English Village, 1957 English
Street North
6. New Business:
a.Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Vision PlanAdvisory Group
b.2016Community Design Review Board Annual 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, JANUARY 17, 2017
1.CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Kempecalled the meeting to order at6:00p.m.
2.ROLL CALL
Chairperson, Bill KempePresent
Boardmember,Jason LamersPresent
Vice Chairperson,Matt LedvinaPresent
Boardmember,Ananth ShankarPresent
Staff Present:Michael Martin, Economic Development Coordinator
Chris Swanson, Environmental & City Code Specialist
3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
BoardmemberShankarmoved to approve the agenda as approved.
Seconded by BoardmemberLamers.Ayes -All
The motion passed.
4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
BoardmemberLamers moved to approve the October 25, 2016,CDRB minutes as submitted.
Seconded by BoardmemberLedvina.Ayes –Boardmembers Lamers,
Ledvina & Shankar
Abstention –Chairperson Kempe
The motion passed.
BoardmemberShankar moved to approve the November 15, 2016,CDRB minutes as submitted.
Seconded by Boardmember Ledvina.Ayes –Chairperson Kempe,
Boardmembers Ledvina
& Shankar
Abstention –Boardmember Lamers
The motion passed.
January 17, 2017
Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes
1
5.DESIGN REVIEW
a.Consider Approval of Hazelwood Medical Commons –Phase 2, 2945 Hazelwood Street
North
Design Review
Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment
i.Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin gave the report on the
Hazelwood Medical Commons, Phase 2, 2945 Hazelwood Street for the Design
Review and the Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment and answered questions of
the board.
ii.Principal, Mark Davis, The Davis Group, 222 South9th Street,#3255,
Minneapolis, MN, addressed and answered questions of the boardfor the project.
Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approvethe 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, dated
January 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.
January 17, 2017
Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes
2
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 the public health, safety or welfare.
b.The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all
required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished
exterior improvements by June 1 if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter, or
within six weeks of occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer.
8.All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of the environmental and economic
development department may approve minor changes.
Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approve the plans date-stamped December 23, 2016, for 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 anddeletions are crossed out):
1.Signs on the east elevation shall be limited to one 10’ X 30’ sign over the main entrance and
eightthree3’ X 25’ tenant signs. Three 3’ X 25’ tenant signs shall be located south of the
main entrance and five 3’ X 25’ tenantsigns 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 than 1612feet in height and must incorporate building materials and design
in its base.
Seconded by Boardmember Lamers.Ayes –All
The motion passed.
This item does not need to go to the city council.
January 17, 2017
Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes
3
b.Consider Approval of Design Review for new McDonald’s Building, 1797 Cope Avenue
East
i.Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin gave the report on the design review
for the new McDonalds Building at 1797 Cope Avenue East and answered questions of
the board.
ii.Vicky Suddard?? Area Construction Manager for McDonald’sRestaurant, addressed and
answered questions of the board.
iii.Andy Duvall ?? representing the company that owns McDonaldswas present but did not
address the board.
Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approvethe 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:(additions are underlined and in bold).
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 January 9, 2017.
3.The applicant shall comply with the conditions noted in the environmental report by Shann
Finwall dated January 9, 2017.
4.Submit to staff copies of the executed agreements for cross-access between the applicant
and 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.The applicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit or cash escrow in the amount of 150
percent of the cost of installing the landscape before getting a building permit.
7.The bollards indicated on the plans shall be acolor to match the architecturalelements
of the building.
8.The board recommends the applicant provide outdoor seating on the south side of the
site.
Seconded by Boardmember Shankar.Ayes –All
The motion passed.
This item does not need to go to the city council.
c.Consider Approval of New Buildings at Maple Ridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear
Avenue
Design Review
Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment
January 17, 2017
Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes
4
i.Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin gave the report on the new
buildings at Maple Ridge Shopping Center at 2515 White Bear Avenue for Design
Review and Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment and answered questions of the
board.
ii.Architect, Jeff Schuler, Firm Ground Architects & Engineers, Inc., 275 Market
Street, Suite 368, Minneapolis, addressed and answered questions of the board.
Boardmember Ledvinamoved to approvethe 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:
(additions are underlined and in bold).
1.This approval is good for two years. After two years, the design-review process 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 the
72 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 Maplewood EngineeringReport from
Jon Jarosch dated January 9, 2017.
6.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 thedevelopment.
7.Before any certificates of occupancy are issued for the new buildings, the property owner
shall 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 west side of the lot is
kept 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 and economic
development may approve minor changes.
11.Work with staff for approval of a suitable architectural trash enclosure on the north
side of Building one.
12.The north elevation of Building one would be modified to include spandrel glass
feature with a matching awning to improve aesthetics for the north elevation.
January 17, 2017
Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes
5
13.The CDRB does not approve the drive thru for building two at this time. This would
have to come backfor submittal andapproval from the community design review
board.
Board member Ledvinamoved to approve the comprehensive sign plan amendment to allow
signage for new standalone buildings at Maple Ridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue.
Approval of the comprehensive sign plan amendment is subject to the following conditions:
(additions are underlined and in bold).
1.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.
2.Each tenant of the two new buildings will be allowed two wall signs.
3.The location of wall signs for Building twois limited to the eastand west elevations of the
buildings, with a tenant allowed up to one sign per elevation.The location of the wall signs
for Building one is not specified.Each tenant of Building one will be allowed two wall
signs.
4.Each wall sign shall be comprised ofindividual channel letters. Cabinet signs are prohibited.
5.The size of each wall sign must comply with the city’s sign ordinance requirements.
Seconded by Boardmember Lamers.Ayes –All
The motion passed.
This item will go to the city council.
6.NEWBUSINESS
a.2016 Code Enforcement Year-End Report
i.Environmentaland City Code Specialist, Chris Swanson gave the 2016 Code Enforcement
Year End Report and answered questions of the board.
No action was needed.
b.Election of Officers (No Report)
Boardmember Lamers moved to recommend retaining the current ChairBill Kempe and Vice
Chairperson Matt Ledvina.
Seconded by Boardmember Ledvina.Ayes –All
The motion passed.
7.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None.
January 17, 2017
Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes
6
8.BOARDPRESENTATIONS
Boardmember Ledvina gave an update from his representation of the CDRB at apast city council
meeting.
Boardmember Ledvina said he would represent the CDRBat an upcomingcity council meeting
for the Mapleridge Shopping Center at 2515 White Bear Avenue.
9.STAFF PRESENTATIONS
None.
10.ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Kempeat7:31p.m.
January 17, 2017
Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes
7
MEMORANDUM
TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager
FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator
DATE:March 15, 2017
SUBJECT:Consider Approval of Design Review, LivINN Suites,285 Century Avenue
North
Introduction
Project Description
Bernie Frey, of Frey Development and Management, is proposing to build a 2,940 square foot
addition to its existing hotel building at 285 Century Ave North. This building expansion would
be for the hotel to prep and serve –this does not expand the number of rooms available for
lodging.
Request
The applicant is requesting cityapproval ofdesign reviewfor the building expansion.
Background
August 20, 1981:Thecity council approved building plans for the hotel.
Discussion
Design Review
Architectural
Thematerials and colors to be used for this proposed building expansion will match what’s
existing on the hotel building.
Site Layout
Access to the site is already established by the existing building and will remain consistent with
thebuilding expansion. The addition will be located on the north side of the existing building.
This expansion will be located in an area that is already largely impervious surface. However,
because this site is within the shoreland overlay district for Tanners Lake the applicant was
submit documentation to the city engineer showing that no increases are being made to the
site’s overall percentage of impervious surface. If any increases are made to the impervious
surface of this site due to the building expansion, the applicant will be required to offset
elsewhere on site.
Parking
This building expansion will eliminate three parking spaces on this site. City ordinance requires
one parking space per room available for lodging. This hotel has 114 rooms available. After the
elimination of the three spaces, there are 106 parking spaces on site. The hotel has a long
standing parking agreement with the restaurant to the south, allowing for up to eight vehicles to
be parked on their site. With that agreement, the applicant is meeting the parking requirements.
Before any building permits are issued, the applicant must submit to the city a copy of the
parking agreement with the neighboring property.
Landscaping
Two trees will be removed due to this building project. The applicant will be required to plant
two new trees on site in order to comply with the city’s tree preservation ordinance.
Department Comments
EngineeringDepartment, Jon Jarosch
Please see Jon Jarosch’s engineering report, dated March 7, 2017,attached to this report.
Recommendations
A.Approve the design plans date-stamped March 7, 2017, for the building expansion for the
LivINN Suites,located at 285 Century Avenue. 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. 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 March 7, 2017.
3.Submit to staffcopiesof the executedparkingagreementwith the property located at
225 Century Avenue North.
4.Submit to staff a landscape plan showing the planting location oftrees in order to meet
the city’s tree preservation requirements or prior to receiving a building permit.
5.Prior to the issuance of agrading or building permit, the applicant shall provide
documentation for the city engineer’s approval detailing the amount, if any, of
impervious surface this project will be adding to the overall site and where it will be
offset elsewhere on site.
Reference Information
Site Description
Site Size:2.29Acres
Existing Land Use: Hotel
Surrounding Land Uses
North: Vacant Land
South: Restaurant
East:Tanners Lake
West:Century Avenue and 3M Campus
Planning
Existing Land Use:Commercial (C)
Existing Zoning:HeavyManufacturing(M2)
Application Date
The city deemed the applicant’s application complete on March 7, 2017. The 60-day review
deadline for a decision is May 6, 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.Building Elevations
4.Jon Jarosch, engineering comments, dated March 7, 2017
5.Applicant’s plan set (separate attachment)
Attachment 1
LivINN Hotel Expansion
March 2, 2017
City of Maplewood
Information
Overview Map
Legend
!
I
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
Engineering Plan Review
PROJECT: 25 CenturyAvenue
PROJECT NAME:LivInn Hotel Addition
PROJECT NO: 17-05
COMMENTS BY: Jon Jarosch, P.E. – Staff Engineer
DATE:3-7-2017
PLAN SET: 2-14-2017 Submittal
Theapplicant is proposingtoconstructan addition to the existing hotel building at 25
CenturyAvenue.The applicantis requestinga reviewof the currentdesign.
As theamount of disturbance on this site is less than0.5 acre, the applicantis not requiredto
meet the City’s stormwater quality, rate control, and other 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.
Grading and Erosion Control
1)The applicant shall provide a plan depicting proposed elevations around the addition and
detail how it will match into the existing site.
2)The applicant shall provide an erosion control plan.
3)Perimeter control measures shall be installedaround the proposed construction areato
contain eroded materials within the site.
4)All slopesshall be 3H:1V or flatter.
5)Inlet protection devices shall be installed onallexistingand proposedonsite storm
seweruntil all exposed soils onsite are stabilized.This includes storm sewer on adjacent
streets that could potentially receive construction related sedimentor debris.
6)Adjacent streetsand parking areasshall be swept as needed to keep the pavement
clear of sediment and construction debris.
7)All pedestrian facilities shall be ADA compliant.
Attachment 4
Sanitary Sewer and Water Service
8)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 a grading permit.
9)The applicant shall meet anyrequirements of Saint Paul Regional Water Services.
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.
10)Grading and erosion control permit
-END COMMENTS -
MEMORANDUM
TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager
FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator
DATE:March 13, 2017
SUBJECT:Consider Approval of Design Review, 3M Parking Ramp –B229,3M
Campus
Introduction
Project Description
Brian Fitzgerald, of TKDA and on behalf of 3M, is proposing to build a new structured parking
ramp to replace the existing B229 parking ramp on the 3M campus. The existing parking ramp
is being demolished in two phases. The first phase of demolition has started. The second phase
will follow the construction of the proposed new ramp.
Theproposed parking ramp willconsist of fourtiers and have a smaller overall footprint than the
existing ramp.Thenew parking ramp will provide1,850parking stalls to servethe 3M campus.
The existing ramp that is being demolished contained 1,556 parking spaces. An additional
surface parking lot willalso be built, directly north of the new parking ramp.
Request:
The applicant is requesting cityapproval ofdesign reviewfor the new parking rampand site
improvements.
Discussion
Design Review
Architectural
Each of the ramp’s elevations will be constructed with colored and textured precast spandrels
delineating from the building’s base. Directly above the spandrels will be an anodized aluminum
corrugated and perforated metal panel facade extending to four feet above the top level. Color
of the metal panels will vary in shades of off-white to gray to create a curtain veil appearance.
The stairwell entrances will be constructed with white aluminum composite panels, a window
wall system and zinc-colored rain screen panels. The applicant’s submitted plans detail all
materials and colors to be used on the structure.
Site Layout
The location of the parking ramp is within the 3M campus and will be accessed solely by private
roads that are controlled and maintained by 3M. All building setback requirements are being
complied with. Last year, 3M reconstructed 8th Street within its campus and access to the new
ramp will come exclusively from this private roadway.
Landscaping
The number of significant trees removed for the 8th Street reconstruction project and for the
new ramp project total 106 trees. This is less than 20 percent of the trees on the 3M campus
property. The city will require the replacement of one tree per significant and specimen tree
removed, which would be 106 trees. Replacement trees are also required to be a minimum of
two caliper inches in size when planted. The proposed new ramp’s landscaping plan, which
includes 8th Street tree plantings, proposes planting 82 new trees. When the new parking lot is
built north of the new ramp an additional 32 trees will be planted. Altogether, 114 total new trees
are proposed to be planted, which exceeds the required 106 replacement trees. The applicant
will be required to submit a landscaping escrow which the city will maintain and release once all
the trees have been planted and have survived for at least one year.
Lighting
The applicant’s lighting plan meets ordinance requirements.
Department Comments
Fire Department, Fire Marshal Butch Gervais
Applicant will need to install fire department standpipes in the ramp in case of fire. The stand
pipes can be dry with the FDC on the main level with a 4 inch Stortz connection that will service
the standpipes.
Recommendations
A.Approve the design plans date-stamped March 7, 2017, for the new parking ramp, B229, to
be located on the 3M Campus. 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. Staff may approve
minor changes to these plans.
2.The city requires a parking lot permit be issued before a new surface parking lot is built.
3.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.
This assurance will only be released upon the completion of the surface parking lot to
the north of the ramp and after all required trees have survived for at least one year.
Reference Information
Site Description
Site Size:379Acres
Existing Land Use: 3M Campus
Surrounding Land Uses
North: 3M Campus
South: 3M Campusand Interstate 94
East:3M Campus
West:3M Campus
Planning
Existing Land Use:Industrial(I)
Existing Zoning:HeavyManufacturing(M2)
Application Date
The city deemed the applicant’sapplication complete onMarch 7, 2017. The 60-day review
deadline for a decision is May 6, 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.Applicant’s plan set (separate attachment)
Attachment 1
3M Parking Ramp
March 7, 2017
City of Maplewood
Information
Overview Map
Legend
!
I
0490
Feet
Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Attachment 5
March 3, 2017
New 3M B229 Parking Ramp Project
3M Center - Maplewood, Minnesota
Community Design Review Board Submittal
Project Narrative
SUMMARY
This project is a new structured parking ramp to replace the existing B229 parking ramp. The existing parking
ramp is being demolished in two phases. The first phase of demolition has stared. The second phase will follow
the construction of this new ramp. The new B229 Ramp is designed to create a robust, long lasting, and highly
functional parking ramp for the 3M Campus. The Ramp consists of 4 tiers with access off the West and
Northwest on tier 2 and East on tier 1. Three stair towers are located to accommodate a maximum travel
distance of 300 feet with the northeast tower housing two machine-room-less (MRL) electric traction elevators.
An existing skyway from 3M Building 229 will connect on tier 2 at the northeast stair/elevator tower. A security
checkpoint is located at this connection within the skyway in a way that maintains emergency egress. With 1850
(approximate) parking stalls for vehicles and designated bicycle/motorcycle parking, this facility will function at a
high level for years to come. In addition to the new parking ramp, a new on-grade parking lot is planned for just
north of the ramp. The construction of the new parking lot would follow the completion of this new ramp and the
demolition of the remainder of the existing ramp. A conceptual plan is included with this submittal for reference.
ARCHITECTURAL
At elevations other than the stair towers, colored/textured precast spandrels create a water table delineating the
buildings base. Directly above the spandrels is an anodized aluminum corrugated and perforated metal panel
facade extending to 4’-0” above the top level. Color of the metal panels will vary in shades of off-white to gray to
create a curtain veil appearance. The metal panel perforation provides greater than 50% open space in
compliance with the requirements for a Type IIA Open Parking Ramp.
The exterior wall construction is metal panel rainscreen or precast cavity wall. In each condition the structural
backup is cast-in-place concrete with cold-formed metal framing used at parapets. A continuously applied air and
moisture barrier wraps exterior face of the backup wall. Rigid foam insulation board of an R-Value of no less than
14 is placed between the backup structure and exterior cladding.
The metal panel rainscreen has two designations, ACP (Aluminum Composite Panel) and RSP (Rain Screen
Panel) in the drawing set. The basis of design for these panels are as follows:
ACP – Vitrabond Route and Return Composite Aluminum Flat Panel in white, dark gray and red.
RSP – Dri-Design Pre-Weathered Zink Shadow Series
An architectural precast base is utilized for durability and protection of the exterior cladding. The base is a
dark gray color with a light acid-etch finish. Curtainwall on the project has anodized black framing with clear
insulated glazing.
LANDSCAPE
The new parking ramp is one of several projects occurring on the 3M campus within the same general area. Other
projects include reconstruction of 8th Street to the west, which is substantially complete at this time, a new North
Parking Lot that is currently being designed and planned to be constructed to the north of this ramp where an
existing ramp is currently located, and reconstruction of 11th Street to the east which is currently in planning
stages. We are therefore submitting Landscape Plans for this project, which includes landscaping for this ramp
and for 8th Street restoration, as well as landscape plans for the planned future construction of the North Parking
Lot. Landscape Plans have not been developed yet for the 11th Street Reconstruction project.
Attachment 5
New 3M B229 Parking Ramp Project
3M Center - Maplewood, Minnesota
Community Design Review Board Submittal
Project Narrative
March 3, 2017
The number of significant trees removed for the 8th Street Reconstruction project and for the New Ramp project
total 106 trees. This is less than 20% of the trees on the 3M property. We understand that in this case the Owner
is required to replace one (1) tree per significant and specimen tree removed, which would be 106 trees, and that
the trees are required to be a minimum of two (2.0) caliper inches in size. The proposed Ramp Project, which
includes 8th Street tree plantings, proposes planting 82 new trees. The North Parking Lot proposes planting 32
new trees. Taken together, 114 total new trees are proposed to be planted, which exceeds the required 106
replacement trees. Additional trees are anticipated to be planted as part of the 11th Street project in the future.
Attached is a list of the significant trees that have been removed for this project, including the species and size.
Existing Conditions and Removals plans for both the 8th Street Reconstruction project and for the Ramp
Demolition project are included and show the sizes, species, and locations of the trees that were removed.
CIVIL
The site consists of a new parking ramp with associated walks, drives, utility improvements and stormwater
management. Walks will be Portland Cement Concrete. Walks were designed with a maximum cross slope of
2% and maximum slope in the direction of travel of 5% wherever possible. Drives will be primarily Asphaltic
Concrete. The substantially complete 8th Street reconstruction project addressed the roadway to the west of the
new ramp, a future project will address the roadway to the east of the ramp. The ramp project will address
access from these private roadways to the ramp entrance and exit ports. Existing Well Water and Chilled water
utilities will be rerouted to accommodate the footprint of the new ramp. Potable water, natural gas and sanitary
sewer services will be brought to the new building in the northwest corner. A portion of firemain on the east side
of the new ramp will be replaced as part of the project, the firemain will be jack and bored, services and final
connections will be open cut. Storm water management for this project includes the use of underground
infiltration chambers and the required storm water calculations have been included in this submittal. We have
been in contact with Ramsey Washington Watershed District; the project has been approved by the Watershed
District Board of Managers.
LIGHTING
Exterior lighting for this project includes the reuse of the existing roadway and parking lot light poles. These poles
have been retrofitted with a new tenon mounted arm and LED area luminaires. This fixture assembly will be
mounted on the forth level of the ramp and also at the 8th Street entrances and exits to the ramp. Existing
roadway lighting will remain on 11th Street until a future project occurs.
Additional wayfinding lighting has been included in the project to light the walkways around the ramp. This
lighting assembly consists of a round post top LED luminaire and a 16 foot round tapered stainless steel pole.
Lighting for the north walkway and surface parking area is to be included as part of a future project. Recessed
LED fixtures have been included in the canopies of all entrances and exits of the building to provide the proper
amount of emergency egress lighting.
All exterior lighting is dark sky compliant and LED in nature. The exterior lighting will not exceed the maximum
level of 0.4 foot candles of illumination at the property line. Attached is a list of the luminaires utilized on this
project along with photometric analysis of the exterior lighting.
End of Narrative
MEMORANDUM
TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager
FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator
DATE:February 15, 2017
SUBJECT:Consider Approval ofFrost-English Village –Phase 2,1957 English
Street North
A.Conditional Use Permit
B.Design Review
Introduction
Project Description
Sherman Associatesis proposing to continue its redevelopment of the 5.5 acre former
Maplewood Bowl site. Phase 1 is complete and open. This phase included 50 units of multi-
family housing built on 4.04 acres of the overall site. Phase 2 is proposed for 107 units of
independent senior, market-rate, housing to be built on 0.96 acres. Phase 3, yet to be proposed,
will consist of approximately 6,000 square feet to be built on the remaining 0.56 acres of land.
Both residential buildings will be served by underground and surface parking.
Requests
To build this development, the applicants are requesting that the city council approve the
following:
1.A conditional use permit for a four-story building, increased front yard setbacksand a
parking waiver.
2.Design review
Background
On January 22, 2014, the Metropolitan Council approved a livable communities demonstration
account (LCDA) grant request for the city of Maplewood for $1,900,000. This grant money was
used for public infrastructure improvements along Frost Avenue and assisted the developer with
the purchase of the Maplewood Bowl site.
On April 13, 2015, the city council approved a conditional use permit, lot division and design
review requests, which were required for this project to move forward. This included building
approval for the first phase which is a four-story, multi-family building with 50 units.
On May 26, 2015, the city council approved a tax-increment financing (TIF) plan for this project.
The TIF plan works to offset a portion of its eligible costs incurred in the redevelopment ofthe
5.5 acre former Maplewood Bowl site. Additionally, the city undertookpublic improvements as
part of the larger Gladstone arearedevelopment plan, which includedcosts spent both inside
and outside of the TIF District. Aportion of these city incurred public improvement costs were
eligible for reimbursement fromTIF revenue.
Discussion
Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan
The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan (pertinent pages attached to this report)
outlines nine guiding principles to redevelopment in the area as follows:
1.Design the future of Gladstone as a village.
2.Transform regional trails into celebrated village corridors.
3.Make Gladstone a compelling quality of life choice.
4.Weave natural systems and ecological function into the built and recreational
environment.
5.Allow Gladstone’s future to whisper the story of its past.
6.Make walkability the standard.
7.Think of Gladstone as a neighborhood for all stages of life.
8.Make the Gladstone redevelopment plan a model for others to follow.
9.Make multi-modal links between Gladstone and areas beyond.
The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan further outlines development strategies for
Frost Avenue North, which includes the former Maplewood Bowl site, as follows:
Achieving a mix of neighborhoodretail services fronting on Frost Avenue and English
Street.
Incorporation of rainwater gardens, alternative pavement strategies, shared parking and
other techniques to minimize surface water runoff and provide for treatment of runoff.
Incorporation of recycled building materials, roof top gardens, solar energy systems and
other sustainable building techniques that contribute to the educational and interpretive
vision of the Gladstone Savanna.
Flexibility to accommodate the bowling alley use and other local neighborhood retail
businesses that desire to stay in the neighborhood.
Redevelopment of the Frost Avenue North area has important financial relationships with
the remainder of the Gladstone Neighborhood. Actual implementation efforts should
explore ways that this project can provide financial resources to other parts of the master
plan, particularly the improvement of Flicek Park and Frost Avenue.
Development may orient toward the regional trails rather than back up to them.
Building heights should be “stepped back” from the street as they grow in height.
2030 Comprehensive Plan and Density
The city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan on January 25, 2010. The 2030
Comprehensive Plan incorporated the land uses and densities established by the Gladstone
Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan guides this site as mixed
use. Mixed use has a density range of 6 to 31 units per net acre. A total of 157 units will be built
on the residential portions of this redevelopment project,which consist of fiveacres of land.
Normally five acres of land would allow up to 155 units within the mixed use density range.
However, the city provides density bonuses to developers for providing underground parking
and affordable housing units.
Foreach underground parking space city code allows 300 square feet to be added to the net
acreage used for density determination. Between Phases 1 and 2, 132 underground spaces
are provided. Also, 300 square feet is added to the net acreage for each affordable unit as
determined by Met Council’s definitionof affordable housing. Phase 1 of this project provided 40
affordable units. Phase 2 is not proposed to contain any affordable units.
When accounting for the additional square footage as allowed by the city code’s density
bonuses, 1.18 acres in net density is added to the site. Adding the 1.18 acres to the 5 acres of
land used for residential in this project givesthe developer 6.18 acres in terms of density
calculations. This allows this site to have up to 191 units. The applicant is proposing 157units
between the two residential phases –well short of the maximum allowed.
Zoning
The site is currently zoned as mixed use (MU). This zoning district allows for a mixed use multi-
family and commercial retail development.
Conditional Use Permit
Four-Story Building
The mixed use district requires a conditional use permit for any residential buildings more than
three-stories or 35 feet in height as well in the cases where the front building setback is greater
than 20 feet. The proposed Phase 2 senior, multi-family building will be a four-story building
and approximately 51feet in height as measure from grade to the mid-point of theroof. The
building in Phase 1 is also four-storiesand of similar overall height.
Thereare three buildings in Maplewood that currently have four-stories. The first one is the
already mentioned Phase 1 building. The other two include the ParkviewCourt Apartments, a
multi-family housing development in Gladstone, which is located just to thewest of theShores
at Lake Phalen development. Parkview Court Apartments were constructedwith four floors in
1965, prior to the city’s requirement that all multi-family housing be limited tothree stories
without a conditional use permit. The city council did approve a four-story seniorhousing
building, called the Seasons at Maplewood, which is part of the Legacy Village planned unit
development.
Increased Front Yard Setbacks
While theGladstone Master Plan encourages buildings along Frost Avenue and English Street
to be three or four-stories tall. The Master Plan also encourages buildings to be stepped back
as they increase in height. This was an issue identified for this project’s Phase 1 building. The
elevation that faces English Street does provide architectural articulation and uses different
textures and materials to provide vertical division.
In addition the elevation is proposed to be setback approximately 97 feet from the front property
line. The Phase 1 building was setback 20 feet along the Frost Avenue property line where
there is more of a concern of a tall building next to a sidewalk and roadway. The area between
English Street will be used for ponding and landscaping working to soften the impact of the taller
building. Staff feels this building and east elevation, even though it varies from the mixed use
setback requirements, still meets the intent of the mixed use zoning district as this project works
to provide a mixture of uses on this redevelopment site while increasing the amount of housing
units available in the neighborhood.
Parking Waiver
Ordinance requires a minimum parking standard of two parking spaces per unit, with at least
one space being covered. The Phase 1 50-unit building met these requirements. Dating back to
2015, the applicant stated they would be seeking a parking waiver for the Phase 2 building. For
the 107-unit Phase 2 building,code would require 214 spaces. The applicant is proposing to
provide 121 spaces with 82 of them being underground. This is a ratio of 1.13 parking spaces
per living unit. The applicant has provided a parking study of more than 20 senior buildingsfrom
around the Twin Cities –including three in Maplewood –and the parking ratios for senior
buildings range from 0.44 to 1.33 spaces per unit. This study is attached to the report. The
Gladstone Master Plan encourages the use of shared parking and staff is recommending a
shared parking agreement be in place between Phases 1, 2 and 3 when it is built. If a parking
shortage becomes an issue the city can require parking be installed on unbuilt areas of the site
including the area dedicated for Phase 3.
Design Review
Site Plan
The Phase 2 building will be constructed on the north side of the site taking advantage of its
proximity to the Gateway Trail. The main entry will be on the south side of the building facing
inward to the overall site. Access to the underground garage will be on the west side of the
building. The access drive lane is already in place and provides connections to Frost Avenue
and English Street. The site plan shows a 39 space parking lot. The applicant is also providing
82 parking spaces in an underground garage.
The city’s mixed use district requires a front yard setback for multiple dwelling buildings to be no
more than 20 feet, with a minimum of zero feet. The mixed use district also allowed increased
setbacks to be approved via a conditional use permit. Staff feels additional landscaping should
be provided between the building and English Street to make this area more of an amenity to
the site. However, staff is comfortable with the increased setback as this is a mixed use
redevelopment project and the Phase 1 building meets the required setbacks and the Phase 3
commercial building will also be fronted near the streets as required by code.
Building Elevations
Exterior building walls adjacent to or visible from a public right-of-way or public open space may
not exceed 40 feet in width. New buildings of more than 40 feet in width are allowed if the
building wall is divided into smaller increments, between 20 and 40 feet in width, through
articulation of the façade. Exterior-building materials shall be classified primary, secondary or
accent material. Primary materials shall cover at least 60 percent of all façades of a building.
Secondary materials may cover no more than 30 percent of all façades of a building. Accent
materials may include door and window frames, lintels, cornices and other minor elements, and
may cover no more than ten percent of all façades of a building. The community design review
board may consider exceptions to the above-mentioned design standards if they uphold the
integrity of the guidelines and result in an attractive, cohesive development design as intended
by ordinance.
The primary materials for theproposed 107-unit senior building are brick, stone and cement
fiber board siding –each utilizingmultiple tones of color. Architectural asphalt shingles will be
placed on the roof and windows and balconies are generously located throughout the building.
Staff finds the building attractively designed and compatible with the building constructed in
Phase 1. Staff feels the design of the building and materials to be used meet the intent of the
mixed use zoning code.
Landscaping
All areas of land not occupied by buildings, parking, driveways, sidewalks or other hard surface
are required to be sodded or mulched and landscaped with approved ground cover, flowers,
shrubbery and trees. Hard-surfaced areas, including sidewalks and patios, must include
amenities such as benches, planters and bike racks.
For parking lots consisting of 20 or more spaces, interior landscape islands are required. Interior
landscape islands shall be at a rate of one landscape island for every ten parking spaces.
Landscape islands shall be a minimum of 144 square feet in area and shall be a minimum of
eight feet in width, as measured from back of curb to back of curb.
Perimeter landscape or pedestrian walls are required for all parking lots and shall be
established along the road and edges of the parking lot. The landscape treatment or pedestrian
wall shall run the full length of the parking lot and be located between the property line and the
edge of the parking lot.
The applicant is proposing to plant eight new trees as part of the Phase 2 project and will also
plant numerous shrubs and perennials throughout the site. Staff feels the planting proposed
around the building and parking lot areas are attractive and sufficient, but feels more attention
needs to be placed on the area between English Street and the building. As mentioned already
in this report, the applicant is requesting an increased building setback from what the mixed use
zoning district would normally allow. In turn it is fair for the city to request this area to become
more of an amenity for the project and to the future residents. While this area is proposed to be
used for stormwater purposes staff would like to see revised site and landscaping plans
showing additional landscaping in this area and the inclusion of benchesor other similar
amenitiesas guided by the Gladstone Master Plan.
Lighting
The applicant will be required to submit a photometric plan before any building permits can be
issued. This photometric plan must meet all city requirements.
Trash Enclosure
All trash and recycling will be maintained within the building, for pick up through the
underground garage. Because of the size of this developmentand number of residents, staff
also recommends that there be trash and recycling receptacleslocated throughout the site to
ensure residents, visitors, and employees have access to these containers.
Unit Sizes
Coderequires minimum unit sizes of 580 square feet forefficiency or one-bedroom units and
two-bedroom units must be at least740 square feet. The units proposed for this building all
meet these requirements.
Department Comments
EngineeringDepartment, Jon Jarosch
Please see Jon Jarosch’s engineering report, dated February 7, 2017, attached to this report.
Building Official, Jason Brash
Build per 2012 IBC, 2012 IMC, 2012 IFGC, 2014 NEC, 2012 Minnesota State Plumbing Code,
2015Minnesota State Fire Code, MN 2015 Accessibility code, MN1306, 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 ComplianceDocumentation
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 plans.
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.
Provide three sets of stamped and signed plans and one digital set.
Fire Department, Fire Marshal Butch Gervais
Applicantwill be required to install fire protection and alarm system with monitoring perstate
and local codes.All contractors must be licensed and shall submit plans and apply and receive
permits before any work is started.
Police Department, Chief Paul Schnell
No issues
Recommendations
A.Approve the conditional use permit resolution attached. This resolution approves the
conditional use permit for a four-story multi-family senior residential building with an
increased front yard setback and a parking waiver. Approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1.The engineering department shall review and determineapproval of all final
construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with allrequirements as
specified in the city engineering department’s February 7, 2017 review.
2.All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped February 8, 2017, andwith
revisions as noted in this approval. The city council may approve major changesto the
plans. City staff may approve minor changes to the plans.
3.This approval is for the Phase 2,107-unit multi-family senior building only. Any future
phases must seek separate approval as required by city code.
4.The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of citycouncil
approval or the permit shall end. The city council may extend thisdeadline for one
year.
5.The Phase 2 building is approved with an increased English Street front yard setback
which is not to exceed 100 feet.
6.The applicant shall submit to staff for approval revised site and landscaping plans
showing additional plantings and amenities being added between the building and
English Street North.
7.A parking waiver of 93 spaces is allowed. If a parking shortage develops the city may
require additional parking be added in unbuilt areas on the site includingareas within
Phases 1 and 3 of this redevelopment project.
8.Applicant shall submit to the city cross access, maintenance and parking agreements
between Phases 1, 2and 3.
9.Applicant shall submit to the city documentation regarding the affordable units in
Phase 1 used to determine the overall residential densities for this development.
Affordable units must meet the standards and definitions as described by the
Metropolitan Council.
B.Approve the design plans for the 107-unit multi-family senior residential building date
stamped February 8, 2017,for the redevelopment project located at 1957 English Street
North. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following:
1.Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
2.Satisfy the requirements set forth in the staff report authored by staff engineerJon
Jarosch, dated February 7, 2017.
3.Satisfy the requirements set forth in the staff report authored by environmentalplanner
Shann Finwall, dated February 15, 2017.
4.Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant must submit tostaff for
approval the following items:
a.Revised landscaping and site plans showing additional plantings and amenities in
the front yard area between the building and English Street North.
b.Submit a photometricplan for staff approval –plan must meet all city requirements.
c.An executed cross access, parking and maintenance agreement betweenPhases
1, 2 and 3must be submitted to the city.
d.A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior
improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work.
5.The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building:
a.Replace any property irons removed because of this construction.
b.Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways.
c.Install all required landscaping and an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all
landscaped areas.
d.Install all required outdoor lighting.
e.Install all required sidewalks and trails.
6.If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
a.The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or
welfare.
b.The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City ofMaplewood
for all required exterior improvements. The owner orcontractor shall complete any
unfinished exterior improvements by June 1of the following year if occupancy of
the building is in the fall or winter orwithin six weeks of occupancy of the building
if occupancy is in thespringor summer.
7.The buildings for Phases Two and Three of the Villages at Frost-Englishdevelopment
are required to be reviewed for design review by the community designreview board.
8.All work shall follow the approved plans. City staff may approve minor changes.
Citizen Comments
Staff surveyed the 55 property owners within 500 feet of this site for their comments. There was
one written reply, which was in favor of the project.
For
I am in favor of the new construction across the street from my property. (Fahey Commercial,
2545 Burl Oak Curve, Hudson, Wisconsin)
Reference Information
Site Description
Site Size:0.96Acres
Existing Land Use: Vacant Land, former Maplewood Bowl Site
Surrounding Land Uses
North: Gateway Trail
South: Phase 1 Multi-Family Building and Liquor Store
East:English Street and Moose Lodge
West:Atlantic Street, a vacant lot, a single-family home and a commercial
building
Planning
Existing Land Use:Mixed Use
Existing Zoning:Mixed Use
Criteria for Approval
Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval
Article V, Sections 44-1091 through 44-1105 states that the city council may grant a CUP
subject to the nine standards for approval noted in the conditional use permit resolution
attached.
Application Date
The city deemed the applicant’sapplications complete onFebruary 8, 2017. The 60-day review
deadline for a decision is April 9, 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.
Attachments
1.Location Map
2.Land Use Map
3.Zoning Map
4.Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan –Guiding Principles
5.Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan –Development Strategies for Frost Avenue
6.Applicant Narrative
7.Site Plan
8.Landscape Plan
9.Building Elevations
10.Applicant’s Submitted Parking Study
11.Staff Engineer Jon Jarosch’s comments, February 7, 2017
12.Environmental Planner Shann Finwall’s comments, February 15, 2017
13.Conditional Use Permit Resolution
14.Applicant’s plans (separate attachment)
Attachment 1
January 27, 2017
City of Maplewood
Information
Legend
!
I
0240
Feet
Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County
Attachment 2
Frost English Village - Phase 2
February 15, 2017
City of Maplewood
Information
Land Use Map
Legend
!
I
Future Land Use
Low Density Residential
Open Space
Mixed Use
0240
Feet
Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County
Attachment 3
Frost English Village - Phase 2
February 15, 2017
City of Maplewood
Information
Zoning Map
Legend
!
I
Zoning
Open Space/Park
Single Dwelling (r1)
Double Dwelling (r2)
Mixed Use (mu)
240
0
Feet
Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County
Attachment 4
Vision and Guiding PrinciplesVision and Guiding Principles
reflect the expressed needs and desires of the people of the Gladstoneborhood. Guiding Principles represent the basic goals of the plan andto be and should capture the essence of hood
in the future. It should be a statement about what this place aspiresThe vision is an overarching statement about the Gladstone Neighbor-just fit cleanly with the next stone block.and
redevelopment project must help to build the future, notGladstone Neighborhood seeks to become. Each developmentbuilt. The vision provides the picture of the cathedral that theare
added or modified without a clear picture of what is beingmanagement works much like the first stonecutter. New pieceschange in a neighborhood. Without a vision, redevelopmentThis
story describes the role of a vision in guiding growth andThe second replied, Im on a team that is building a cathedral.they were doing. The first said, Im cutting this stone
into blocks.According to an old story, two stonecutters were asked what Vision ciples that will help guide sound decision-making.ter. There, one can always come back to the fundamental
prin-challenging decisions is the Vision and Guiding Principles chap-dations. A chapter of particular importance when wrestling witheasy to loose sight of the whys of the various
plan recommen-decades to accomplish. With that kind of timeframe, it will beThe Gladstone Master Plan will take years and in some cases Vision and Guiding Principles Vision and Guiding
Principles
Vision and Guiding PrinciplesVision and Guiding Principles
the future
Gladstone Neigh-
iDesign the future of Gladstone as a village:lished:to the guiding principles. The following principles were estab-sure of the compatibility of a development proposal comes backmirror
what is reflected in the master plan. The ultimate mea-the master plan may be, future development will not alwaysPlanning is a dynamic process, and as thorough and complete as Guiding
Principles ating proposals and furthering the Gladstone vision.be used as a tool for guiding improvements and future development, evalu-used to represent the communitys values and
with the master plan shouldNeighborhood and Maplewood Community. The guiding principles are
are marked by their organic building patterns, mixed & in-
The vision for Gladstone is to be an inspiring, vital and
portray its history, its sense of open space and ecological
presence, and its qualities as a great neighborhood to
stable neighborhood always striving to protect and
Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment PlanVision and Guiding Principles
Gladstone Vision StatementGladstone Vision Statement
Gladstone Vision Statement
Gladstone Vision StatementGladstone Vision Statement
live, play and work in.
villages
populations.considers current and futureaccomplish. Planning mustin some cases decades toThe master plan will take years and
guide sound decision-making.
principles that will helpset of fundamentalThis chapter represents a
Page 3 - 1
Page 3 - 2
Attachment 4
Vision and Guiding Principles
Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan viAllow GladstonesvWeave natural systems and ecological function intoivMake Gladstone aiiTransform regional trails into celebrated village
cor-
past.an interpreter of thethe future can function asstory to tell
designs forGladstone has a rich the story of its pastfuture to whisper tion, and resource cycling.tions as well as facilitate habitat value, rainwater infiltra-ment should have the
infrastructure to support its core func-the built and recreational fabric maintenance.great design and lastinginherent qualities withment that accentuates itslive/work/play environ-Gladstone
should be a of life choicecompelling quality adjust to celebrate them rather than relegate them.gional trail corridors
over time, the village pattern can ridors ence of people.tegrated land uses, intimate human-scale spaces and the pres-
: Gladstone is blessed with two relatively new re-
::
: all village develop-
ixMake the Gladstone masterviiMake walkability
xMake multi-modalviii
has.transportation choices itshould embrace the beyondGladstone and areaslinks between for future projects.magnitude for Maplewood and should provide a success storyredevelopment project
of this followplan a model for others to and recreational alternatives.nities, transit accommodationsness and employment opportu-life-cycle housing options, busi-commodate all stages
in life with of lifeneighborhood for all stages spaces.for all public and privateshould be a top prioritycomfort and safetydestrian connectivity,and maintenance for pe-THE standard
Think of Gladstone as a
: Gladstone should ac-
: Gladstone is the first
: Gladstone
: design
Attachment 5
use structures are encouraged with residential over street levelopportunities for neighborhood retail services. Vertically mixedmercial uses should be a focus in this area and should
includemost intensity of all development in the master plan area. Com-Trail and Flicek Park. This represents the core area with theSavanna. It is bound by Frost Avenue, English Street,
GatewayThis redevelopment site is located immediately north of the Frost Avenue North are anticipated.townhome or rowhouse development patterns. Roughly 45 to 57 unitsThis area is anticipated
to redevelop with predominantly attached·Buildings adjacent to park and open space areas should front·Buildings adjacent to Frost should front onto Frost Avenue.·Access to the development
should be off of Edward Street.·Development should take advantage of views of the Savanna
on to the open space areas.and should present a high quality design.
level units can be penthouse or urban lofts.stories and be less imposing from the street view. The upperthat steps the building back to reduce the impact of multipleDesign features should
be incorporated into 3rd and 4th floorsper acre with a range of building heights being 2 to 4 stories.Residential densities at the core area should be 20 to 30 unitsand English.ground
parking, surface parking and on street parking along FrostAvenue North area will be served by a combination of under-cent to Frost Avenue and English Street. Parking in the Frostallow
new development to fill in around the bowling alley adja-nity also exists for the bowling alley to remain on the site andenues to support a complicated construction process. Opportu-feasible
if other portions of the development can generate rev-rates a concept of putting the bowling alley underground. This isfor a commercial presence. The master plan concept incorpo-as
a good anchor tenant that supports a critical mass necessarytural character. However, a successful bowling alley use can servecal form is a single story use with limited windows and
architec-with the desired character of development in that its most typi-bowling alley. The nature of a bowling alley use is inconsistentarchitecture. A challenge with this site is
the integration of auses should be preserved. This is often referred to as flexibleconvert office or residential uses at street level to future retailspaces at the onset of redevelopment;
however, the ability toways. Market forces may challenge the ability to fill new retailplazas/spaces and not surface parking lots or excessive drive-and Frost Avenue should be dominated
by buildings or publicity and pedestrian friendliness. Frontage along English Streetalong English Street and Frost Avenue to create a sense of activ-commercial. Active store fronts/retail
uses are desired to front
Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment PlanMaster Plan
Page 4 - 19
Page 4 - 20
Attachment 5
Master Plan
Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan underground as an option and would be an additional 40,000 to 50,000 square feet.Roughly 50,000 square feet of neighborhood retail could be
accommodated here. The bowling alley is illustratedbuilding heights to step-back away from Frost and English, with taller structures on the interior of the blocks.uses. It is anticipated
that 205 to 292 units could develop in this area. The desired pattern of development is forFrost Avenue North is the area with the greatest intensity of development and the most critical
mass of retail·Flexibility to accommodate the bowling alley use and other·Incorporation of recycled building materials, roof top gar-·Incorporation of rainwater gardens, alternative
pavement·Achieving a mix of neighborhood retail services fronting oninclude:Key factors to consider in shaping redevelopment in this area
local neighborhood retail businesses that desire to stay in thetive vision of the Gladstone Savanna.techniques that contribute to the educational and interpre-dens, solar energy systems
and other sustainable buildingsurface water runoff and provide for treatment of runoff.strategies, shared parking and other techniques to minimizeFrost Avenue and English Street
·Building heights should be stepped back from the street as·Development may orient toward the regional trails rather·Redevelopment of the Frost Avenue North area has impor-
they grow in height.than back up to them.improvement of Flicek Park and Frost Avenue.resources to other parts of the master plan, particularly theshould explore ways that this project
can provide financialGladstone Neighborhood. Actual implementation effortstant financial relationships with the remainder of theneighborhood.
Attachment 6
Attachment 7
CONSTRUCTION
C400
NOT FOR
PLAN
SITE
Attachment 8
11
2
LANDSCAPE PLAN
NTSNTS
TREE PLANTING DETAILTREE PLANTING DETAIL
3
4
NTSNTS SHRUB PLANTING DETAILSHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
NTSNTS PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAILPERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL
CONSTRUCTION
L100 LANDSCAPE
NOT FOR
PLAN
Attachment 9
Copyright Kaas Wilson Architects
Attachment 9
SD500
Rev. No.RevisionDate
Owner:Project:
Elevations
As indicated
The Villages at Frost-English, Phase
Exterior
II (Senior)
Copyright Kaas Wilson Architects
Attachment 9
SD501
Rev. No.RevisionDate
Owner:Project:
Elevations
As indicated
The Villages at Frost-English, Phase
Exterior
II (Senior)
Attachment 10
Attachment 1
Engineering Plan Review
PROJECT: Villages at Frost & EnglishPhase II – 1955English Street
PROJECT NO: 14-21
COMMENTS BY: Jon Jarosch, P.E. – Staff Engineer
DATE:2-7-2017
PLAN SET:Engineering plansdated 1-24-2017
Theapplicant is proposing to construct Phase II of thethree phase Villages at Frost and English
project. The applicant is requesting design approval for thePhase IIsite plan.
Stormwater management for this site was approved and constructed under Phase I. Phase II
appears to fall in line with the estimated impervious surface coverage noted in the stormwater
management report previously submitted, with only minor changes to the site plan.
Thisreviewdoes not constitute a final review of the plans, as the applicant will need to submit
construction documents for final review,along with ratified agreements, prior to issuing building
and grading permits.
The following 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 of RWMWD shall be met.
2)The applicant shall verify that the volume reduction and rate control providedduring
Phase I continues to meet the City’s requirements underthe current proposal. The
applicant shall provide updated stormwater calculations as necessary and work with the
City to meet the intent of the City’s stormwater ordinance and standards.
3)The applicant shall provide information ensuring the Phase II facility is protected from
the lateral movement of water through the soil due to the close proximity with the
proposed pond.
Grading and Erosion Control
4)Contours shall be provided for the area north of the proposed building.
Attachment 1
5)The infiltration basins and ponding areasshall be protected from sedimentation
throughout construction.
6)Inlet protection devices shall be installed on allexistingand proposedonsite storm
seweruntil all exposed soilsare stabilized.
7)Public and private roadsshall be swept as needed to keep the pavementclear of
sediment 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.
Sanitary Sewer and Water Service
10)Sanitary sewer service piping shall be schedule 40 PVC or SDR 35.
11)The proposed water service modifications are subject to the review and conditions of
Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). The applicant shall submit plans and
specifications to SPRWS for review and meet all requirements they may haveprior to
the issuance of a grading permit by the City.
12)The applicant shall be responsible for paying any SAC, WAC, or PAC charges related to
the improvements proposed with this phase of the project.Appropriate fees shall be
charged during the permittingprocess.
Other
13)The plans shall be signed by a professional engineer currently licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
14)Agreements or easements between the three proposed lots are necessary to address
the drainage, utilities, roads, and parking lots that cross lot lines within the proposed
development. These agreements shall detail theshared usage andresponsibilities of
each lot as it pertains to these common amenities, including long-term maintenance. A
copy of these agreements shall be provided to the City of Maplewood.
15)The Owner shall sign a maintenance agreement, prepared by the City, for all storm
water treatment devices (sumps, storm sewer, infiltration basins, ponds,etc.).
Public Works Permits
Attachment 1
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.
16)Grading and erosion control permit
17)Sanitary Sewer Service Permit
18)Storm Sewer Connection Permit
-END COMMENTS -
Attachment 1
Environmental Review
Project: The Villages atFrost-English Phase II
Dateof Plans:January 24, 2017Landscape Plan
Date of Review: February 15, 2017
Location:1955 English Street
Reviewers: Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
(651) 249-2304,shann.finwall@ci.maplewood.mn.us
Background:
Sherman Associates is proposing a 107-unit apartment building for senior housing at
1957 English Street North. This project is Phase II ofthe redevelopment of the former
Maplewood Bowl site. Phase I was a 50-unit multi-family apartment building which
opened in the summer of 2016. Phase III will be a commercial building adjacent to the
intersection of Frost Avenue and English Street. The overall development must comply
with the City’s tree preservation ordinance and landscape requirements as specified in
the Mixed-Use Zoning District.
1.TreePreservation 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 any
tree that is 28 inches in diameter or larger.
Theordinance requires any significant tree removed during redevelopment of the
site to be replaced based on a tree mitigation calculation. The calculation takes
into account the size of a tree removed versus overall significant trees situated
on the property.The ordinance encourages the preservation of specimen trees.
2.Tree Removal:
a.Phase I: A tree inventory plan dated January 2, 2014, was submitted
during Phase Iof the development. Thetree inventory plan showed a
total of 45 significant treeson the site, equaling 678 diameterinches.The
grading plans showed overall grading for the site, removing 14significant
trees (equaling 177diameterinches).Four of the trees were located in
the Frost Avenue right-of-way and are being removed as partof the City’s
Gladstone Area Phase IIstreet improvements. Two of the trees were
located in the English Street right-of-way to accommodate the new
driveway into the site.
b.Phase II: No additional significant trees will be removed with Phase II.
1
Attachment 1
3.Tree Replacement:
a.Phase I:Because the applicants preserved two specimen trees and
many significant trees located on the north and west side of the site
during the Phase I portion of the development, the City’s tree mitigation
calculation for redevelopment of this site only required the replacement of
16caliper inches (8 – 2” caliper trees).
TheJanuary 1, 2014, landscape plansubmitted for the Phase I
development showed tree replacement for the entire site. A total of 43
new trees were proposed, equaling 90caliper inchesof replacement
trees.Twelve of those trees were planned for the Phase II site.
b.Phase II: The January 24, 2017, landscape plan shows 8 trees (18
caliper inches)planted on the Phase II site, in addition to several shrubs
and perennial plants.The January 1, 2014, landscape plan used to
calculate tree replacement called for 12trees within the Phase II
development.
4. Tree Preservation Recommendation:
a.The applicant must submit a revised landscape plan for staff approval
prior to issuance of a building permit. The landscape plan must show all
recommendations outlined in the Phase I(March 2, 2015) environmental
review are met, including the landscape requirements outlined in the
Mixed Use Zoning District and the addition of at least two trees near the
English street right-of-way to replace trees removed with construction of
the driveway.
2
Attachment 13
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Shane LaFave, of Sherman Associates, has applied for a conditional use
permit for a four-story building, with an increased front-yard setback and a parking waiver in a
MU (mixed use) district.
WHEREAS, Sections 44-681 of the city ordinances requires a conditional use permit for
residential buildings taller than 35 feet or three stories and for buildings with an increased front-
yard setback in a MU (mixed use) zoning district.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the .96 acresite at 1957 English Street North. The
legal description for the property is below:
Lot 2, Block 1, The Villages at Frost-English, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1.On February 21, 2017, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city
staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the
surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the
hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning
commission recommended that the city council _____theconditional use permit
2.On March 13, 2017,the city council discussed the conditional use permit. They
considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city
staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council __________ the above-
described conditional use permit because:
1.The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be
in conformity with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances.
2.The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding
area.
3.The use would not depreciate property values.
4.The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods
of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or
cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare,
smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off,
vibration, general unsightliness,electrical interference or other nuisances.
5.The use would not exceed the design standards of any affected street.
6.The use would be servedby adequate public facilities and services, including
streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems,
schools and parks.
Attachment 13
7.The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or
services.
8.The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site’s natural
and scenic features into the development design.
9.The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1.The engineering department shall review and determine approval of all final
construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with allrequirements
as specified in the city engineering department’s February 7, 2017 review.
2.All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped February 8, 2017, and with
revisions as noted in this approval. The city council may approve major changesto
the plans. City staff may approve minor changes to the plans.
3.This approval is for the Phase 2,107-unit multi-family senior building only. Any future
phases must seek separate approval as required by city code.
4.The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of city
council approval or the permit shall end. The city council may extend thisdeadline for
one year.
5.The Phase 2 building is approved with an increased English Street front yard setback
which is not to exceed 100 feet.
6.The applicant shall submit to staff for approval revised site and landscaping plans
showing additional plantings and amenities being added between the building and
English Street North.
7.A parking waiver of 93 spaces is allowed. If a parking shortage develops the city
may require additional parking be added in unbuilt areas on the site includes areas
within Phases 1 and 3 of this redevelopment project.
8.Applicant shall submit to the city cross access, maintenance and parking agreements
between Phases 1, 2 and 3.
9.Applicant shall submit to the city documentation regarding the affordable units in
Phase 1 used to determine the overall residential densities for this development.
Affordable units must meet the standards and definitions as described by the
Metropolitan Council.
The Maplewood City Council __________this resolution on March13, 2017.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager
FROM:Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
DATE:March 15, 2017
SUBJECT:Rice Street–Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Vision Plan Community Advisory
Group
Introduction
The cities of Maplewood, Roseville, and St.Paul are beginning a visioning plan for the Rice
Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Corridor. Over the next nine months the cities will be
cooperatively developing a vision for the short-and long-term future of the area. The purpose of
the project is to understand and respond to barriers, challenges, benefits, and opportunities
associated with changes in land use, access, transit services, and other facilities around key
nodes in the corridor;and identify potential redevelopment sites throughout the study area.
Background
In fall 2015, the St.Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, East Metro Strong, and Ramsey County
received a technical assistance grant for Smart Growth America to undertake a preliminary
assessment of the Larpenteur Avenue corridor. This process brought together city and county
staff and elected officials to learn and discuss opportunities around smart growth development
for the corridor. An outcome of that process lead to the identification of Rice Street and
Larpenteur Avenue as a top reinvestment priority.
In August 2016, the St. Paul Area Chamberof Commerce, in coordination with the cities, hosted
a public outreach event to learn what the key issues and opportunities were for those living in
the corridor.
In winter 2016, thecities’ elected officials and staff began working together to coordinate efforts
in this area with the St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce acting as the project facilitator.
Early 2017, the cities entered into a Cooperative Funding Agreement tohire a consulting firm to
assist in the planning process. Request for proposals were released, and the consulting firm of
Perkins + Will were hired to manage and facilitate the planning process, and draft a vision plan
for the Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway.
Discussion
The timeline for the Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway planning process includes a kick
off meeting in April, planning and community engagement being conducted from May through
November, and final plan document complete by December 2017.The final plan will be
included in Maplewood’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and will be used to help guide
redevelopment and reinvestment in the area moving forward.
As part of the planning process, a community advisory group made up of stakeholders from
each city will help guide the Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Area vision. The advisory
group will meet approximately five times throughout the planning process to help determine
community needs and desires, review plan concepts, and provide input on major design
elements.Each city will recruit six members to serve on the advisory group, with one of those
members being appointed from each cities’ planning commission.The advisory group will meet
approximately five times throughout the planning process to help determine community needs
and desires, review plan concepts, and provide input on major design elements. Date, time,
and location of advisory group meetings to be determined--but will be flexible to meet all
members’ schedules. Applications for the advisory group will be accepted through April 14.
Recommendation
Consider appointingone of the Community Design Review Board membersto serve on the Rice
Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Area Vision Plan CommunityAdvisory Group.
Attachments
1.Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Map
2.Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Vision Plan Community Advisory Group
Description and Responsibilities
3.Rice Street–Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Vision Plan Community Advisory Group
Application
2
Attachment 1
LITTLE CANADA
ice St
MAPLEWOOD
ROSEVILLE
SAINT PAUL
Arlington Ave
Maryland Ave
Front Ave
Ramsey County, Minnesota
Attachment 2
Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Vision Plan
Community AdvisoryGroup (CAG)
Goal of the CAG
Provide community input to help shape the development of plans for the Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue
Gateway study area. The study area generally encompasses the intersection of Rice Street and
Larptentuer Avenue and those street corridors for a determined distance within the Cities of
Maplewood, Roseville, and St. Paul. The primary purpose of the project is to understand and respond to
barriers, challenges, benefits and opportunities associated with changes in land use, access, transit
services, and other facilities that are located around key nodes; and review potential redevelopment
sites throughout the study area. The planning process will also work with local stakeholders to develop
visionary plans for both key sites and the study area as a whole.
Selection Criteria
Knowledge and experience in the following areas:
Neighborhood desires and concerns for the project area
Small businesses in the area
Employees from the area
Large businesses with a regional presence
Neighborhood and business organizations
Communities of color
Planning & urban design, especially transit-oriented development
Sustainable development & environmental practices
Multi-modal transportation
Local & regional housing and commercial development markets
Qualities:
Forward thinking
Positive problem solver
Collaborative
Respectful of different perspectives
Able to see the big picture and tradeoffs
Variety of skill sets or interests
Role of the CAG
Help to determine community needs and desires for the project area.
Review plan concepts and provide input on major design elements.
Bring suggestions from community, stakeholders, and respective organizations.
Help communicate project and plan review process to community.
Provide guidance to City staff(s) on final recommendations for project and plan approval. Final
plans to be complete by December 2017.
Ensure that the full range of issues are discussed during the design process.
Committee Membership Expectations
Meetings will start and end on time. Members must arrive on time to meetings. Members
should be committed to attending approximately (5) meetings with project consultant team,
beginning May and ending October 2017.
Members will be respectful of the opinions and concerns of other committee members or
people meeting with the committee.
Members will review all written materials distributed to the committee.
Members will inform City(s) staff if they cannot attend a meeting, and review materials and
results from that meeting prior to the next committee meeting.
Attendance at all meetings is expected and critical. Unexcused absences from two or more
meetings will result in removal from the committee.
The goal of this process is an open and fair discussion of the issues during committee meetings.
Members will avoid off-line group discussions that are not part of the public process.
Members acknowledge that the City’s policymakers (elected and appointed) may make
decisions they do not agree with but that does not mean the process was flawed or unfair.
Selection of Committee Membership
There will be up to 18 individuals placed on to the CAG.
The CAG membership will include one planning commissioner from each City.
Placement of the CAG members will be determined by the Gateway Area Planning Committee
(GPC), a group of elected officials and City staff from each community. Membership will be
based on the individual’s knowledge of the gateway project area, unique skill set, and
experiences. Members will be asked to draw on these experiences when participating in
committee discussions. While many committee members may be members of other groups and
organizations, committee members are not, for purposes of this committee, considered official
representatives of another group.
CAG Membership Application Deadline
CAG applications must be submitted to each prospective City by April 14, 2017.
The GPC will notify applicants of the final committee selection by the end of April 2017.
2
Attachment 3
Application for Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Vision Plan
Community Advisory Group (CAG)
The cities of Maplewood, Roseville, and Saint Paul are seeking interested community
stakeholders to serve on the Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Vision PlanCommunity
Advisory Group. The cities share a common interest in supporting reinvestment and
redevelopment at the Rice Street-Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Planning Area and have a
unique opportunity to cooperatively develop a vision for the short- and long-term future of the
area.The Community Advisory Group will assist with the vision plans.
City You Represent(circle one): MaplewoodRosevilleSt. Paul
Name:
Home Address:
Phone: E-mail:__
Occupation:
Place of Employment:
Volunteer Commitment(s): Current:
____________________________________________________________________________
Why are you interested in serving on this Community Advisory Group?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
What skills/trainings or experienceswould you bring to the work of the Community Advisory
Group?
____________________________________________________________________________
Would you identify yourself as representing any of the following? (Check all that apply)
Advocacy organization: Major employer
_______________________
Non-profit organization
Artist
Real estate finance and
Business or professional
development
organization:____________
Related commission/task
District Council/Neighborhood
force:_________________
organization:____________
Small business
Ethnic/Cultural Community
Otherresident
Submit Applications by Friday, April 14, 2017,to:
Maplewood: Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner,shann.finwall@maplewoodmn.gov
Roseville: Kari Egerstrom Collins, Community Development Director,
kari.collins@cityofroseville.com
St. Paul: Jamie Radel, Senior Planner, jamie.radel@ci.stpaul.mn.us
VOLUNTARY DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE
This form is part of the City’s effort to increase diversity on boards and commission and knowledge of your status will assist us in
monitoring the success of our efforts. You are not required to provide the information requested on this form.
How did youhear about this commission?
City website Neighborhood or Community Organization Newsletter or Website
Boards & Commissions Subscribed Email Personally Invited to Apply
CityMailing Other, please explain here
How do you self-identify racially?
White/Caucasian Hispanic Black/African-American
Asian or Pacific IslanderAmerican Indian or Alaskan Native Unknown
Some other race
How do you self-identify? Female Male
Are you living with a disability? Yes No
Thank you for your participation!
The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13) governs the City’s use of the information contained
in this application. Some of the information sought in this application is private data under the Act. The requested informationwill be
used by the appointing authority to carry out the City’s official appointment responsibilities. You are not required to provide any
information. However, failure to answer the application questions may cause the appointing authority to reject yourapplication. The
majority of items contained in this application are public, including name, address, employment, skills, training and experience, and
are therefore available to anyone requesting it. The remaining items on the application form are classified as private. The private data
is available only to you and to other persons in the City, who because of work assignments, reasonable require access to the
information.
2
MEMORANDUM
TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager
FROM:Bill Kempe, Community Design Review Board Chair
DATE:February 13, 2017
SUBJECT:Approval of the 2016Community Design Review Board Annual Report
Introduction
Annually the community design review board (CDRB) reports the board’s actions and activities for
the city council for the previous year. In 2016, the CDRB reviewed the following 21items during its
9meetings:
Type of Proposal#Reviewed
New DevelopmentProposals8
1.Design Review, AT&T New Retail Building,3070 White Bear Avenue(March 22, 2016)
2.Design Review, Chick-fil-A,3035 White Bear Avenue(March 22, 2016)
3.Design Review, Taco Bell New Building,1965 County Road D East(April 26, 2016)
4.Design Review, Hazelwood Medical Commons, 2945 Hazelwood Street North (May 24,
2016and September 20, 2016)
5.Design Review, Koob Moo Spiritual Center, 1259Gervais Avenue East (August 3, 2016)
6.Design Review, Beyond Indoor Storage, 1315 Beam Avenue(August 16, 2016 and October
25, 2016)
7.Design Review, Rice Street Shoppes, 2158 Rice Street North (October 25, 2016)
8.Design Review, Maplewood Alzheimer’s Special Care Center, 1700 Beam Avenue
(November 15, 2016)
Expansions/Remodels/Revisions7
1.Design Review, Hill-Murray SchoolFootball Field, 2625 Larpenteur Avenue East (February
23, 2016)
2.Design Review, Costco Gas Canopy Expansion,1431 Beam Avenue East(April 26, 2016)
3.Comprehensive Sign Plan,Sarrack’s Liquors,2305 Stillwater Road East(May 24, 2016)
4.Design Review, Hill-Murray School Entrance Plaza, 2625 Larpenteur Avenue East (August
3, 2016)
5.Design Review and Comprehensive Sign Plan, ALDI,3000 White Bear Avenue(August 3,
2016)
6.Design Review, Metro Heating and Cooling,1220 Cope Avenue East(November 15, 2016)
7.Design Review, Maple Ridge Shopping Center,2515 White Bear Avenue(November 15,
2016)
Special Projects and Presentations6
1.2015CDRB Annual Report (February 23, 2016)
2.2015Code Enforcement Year-End Report (February 23, 2016)
3.Election of Officers (February 23, 2016)
4.City Council Workshop Regarding City Commissions and Boards(April 26, 2016)
5.Approval of a Resolution of Appreciation for Leo Burger(May 24, 2016)
6.Amendments to the CDRB’s Rules of Procedure (August 3, 2016)
Total
21
Comparative Information
YearNumber of Items Reviewed
200633
200727
2008 15
200918
2010 20
201125
201228
201321
201414
201518
201621
Membership
The CDRB consists of five members appointed by the city council. Membership terms are for two
years, with extensions for additional terms approved by the city council. The current membership
is as follows:
Board Member Membership BeganTerm Expires Attendance
Matt Ledvina 3/10/974/30/17 7of9
Jason Lamers 5/26/094/30/18 7of9
Bill Kempe2/11/134/30/18 8 of 9
Ananth Shankar 8/8/944/30/19 8of9
Melissa Peck 2/13/174/30/19 N/A
MemberShankar’s term wasup for reappointment in 2016.He was re-appointed to the board.
Member Ledvina’s term is up for reappointment this year. During 2016 Leo Burger resigned from
the CDRB as he moved outside of the city. In February 2017, Melissa Peck was appointed by the
city council to fill this vacancy.
Discussion
2016Actions/Activities
In 2016, the CDRB reviewed 21items, anincrease from the previous year. In 2016, the CDRB
sawan increasein thenumber of new developments being reviewed. Over the last few years the
majority of CDRB review have involved remodels,revisionsandexpansionsso it is a positive sign
to see so many new construction projects. The CDRB also reviewed 11additional projects via the
15-day minor construction review process. In 2016, the CDRB expects to review a similar number
of projects.
In 2016,the CDRB reviewed mainly commercial projects –most notably the Hazelwood Medical
Commons and Beyond Storage. The Hazelwood Medical Commons, which willbe a medical office
building with 140,000 square feet, has started construction. Beyond Storage will be a 100,000
square foot indoor storage facility. Grading work on this facility began last fall with building
construction expected to start in the spring.
In-fill development and expansion has become the norm for the city since Maplewood is
approximately 95 percent developed and there are not many remaining vacant sites available for
residential and commercial projects. The projects the city is likely to see will be more complex and
time consuming due to redevelopment efforts made throughout Maplewood
2017Activities
In addition to its design review duties, the CDRB lists these potential activities for 2017:
1.The CDRB has a strong desire to work on broader design-related policy issues for the city; the
CDRB does not have to be just a reactive group.
2.Continue having in-service training sessions for the CDRB. Specifically, the CDRB would like to
explore developing an approved materials list to help guide development better from an
architecture point of view. Perhaps different areas of the city would have different approved list
to match existing and desired exteriors.
3.Continue developing policy guidelines for vegetation use along public rights-of-way.
4.Focus on educating the CDRB on sustainable building practices.
Conclusion
In 2017, the CDRB will continue its dedication to the quality design of buildings and developments,
ensuring a high quality of life for the citizens of Maplewood.
Budget Impact
None.
Recommendation
Approve the CDRB’s 2016annual report.