Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/13/2006 AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, June 13, 2006 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers. Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. RollCall 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: a. April 25, 2006 b. May 9, 2006 5. Unfinished Business: None Scheduled 6. Design Review: a. Maple Leaf Ridge Business Center Comprehensive Sign Plan - 2475/2485/2495 Maplewood Drive b. Ramsey County Library Comprehensive Sign Plan - Southwest Corner of Legacy Parkway and South lawn Road (Legacy Village) c. Comforts of Home Comprehensive Sign Plan - 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street 7. Visitor Presentations: 8. Board Presentations: a. June 12, 2006, City Council Meeting 9. Staff Presentations: 10. Adjourn DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, APRIL 25,2006 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Board member John Hinzman Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina Chairperson Linda Olson Board member Joel Schurke Board member Ananth Shankar Absent Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Schurke requested a short discussion regarding the lack of funding for clean up of open space in Maplewood to be discussed under Board Presentations as item b. Board member Ledvina moved to approve the agenda as amended. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes -Ledvina, Olson, Schurke, Shankar The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for April 11, 2006. Board member Schurke had changes to page 2, seventh paragraph, changing the word sodiFFlont to sentiment. Chairperson Olson had changes to pages 2, 5, and 8. On page 2, second paragraph, add a paragraph indent after the word 18 months indenting the discussion about Board member Ledvina as its own paragraph. On page 5, third paragraph, Chairperson Olson asked if the second sentence could be stricken from the discussion which states The St. Paul Tourist Cabin site has a letter of intent from Central Community Housing Trust (CCHT). (Chairperson Olson could not remember if there was a letter of intent or not. As recording secretary that is what I remembered hearing at the HRA meeting but then Ms. Finwall thought that was incorrect and said staff would verify that and include the proper language.) On page 8, in the fourth paragraph, she thought this was a school board issue and did not want to cause any unnecessary grief by speaking out of turn and asked if the paragraph could read Chairperson Olson said the population of school age children in this area of Maplewood is on the decline. and there may bo a need to closo another school in Maple'l.'ood. So t!:lere would bo no need to build no'l.' schools in this area and which appears not to be an issue. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 2 Board member Ledvina asked if it was appropriate for board members to amend statements as they were made and reflected in the minutes? He thought the minutes were intended to reflect what was actually said at the meeting. If there was a different meaning or if there was an error made, that's different, but he questioned if the board members should be removing or striking text from the minutes if those were statements that were actually made? Ms. Finwall said to clarify, you as a board member could change language stating that this is what you actually meant verses what you actually said and that would be appropriate but to change the intent may not be proper. Chairperson Olson said the reason she suggested the edits is for the purpose of accuracy. Board member Ledvina said if it was not what you actually said then it should be changed but if it what was what you said and you just don't want it misinterpreted, then it should remain in the minutes for the record. Chairperson Olson said once the minutes are approved they go onto many different levels and become documents of record and she doesn't want her passionate statements to be misconstrued. Board member Schurke said Board member Ledvina brings up an interesting point. Maybe Chairperson Olson could clarify for the record what she meant to say and have it recorded in the minutes now. Chairperson Olson said she would like the items she brought up to be clarified in the minutes but if it would cause conflict they should remain as she stated during the meeting. She didn't feel it was appropriate for her to be speaking for the school board or for CCHT, which was the interpretation of comments she had heard at previous meetings. Board member Schurke moved approval of the minutes of April 11 , 2006, as amended. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes --- Olson, Schurke, Shankar Abstention - Ledvina The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Town Center Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment (Best Buy) - 1795 County Road 0 (6:10 - 7:05 p.m.) Ms. Finwall said Paul Anderson of WCL Associates, representing Best Buy, is proposing signage for the new Best Buy store located at 1795 County Road D. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 3 The new Best Buy store is currently under construction and is located within the Town Center Shopping Center. Best Buy is proposing three new wall signs on their building and is also proposing to reface the existing Frank's Nursery freestanding sign located along the highway. All existing signs on the current store will be removed. The city's sign code requires all multi-tenant buildings with five or more tenants to have a comprehensive sign plan approved by the community design review board (CDRB). Any amendments to the approved plan must be reviewed by the CDRB. Best Buy is requesting an amendment to Town Center's existing comprehensive sign plan. Chairperson Olson asked staff which of the wall signs she would recommend removing in her proposed conditions? Ms. Finwall said she would leave that up to the board and the applicant. Board member Schurke said on page 2 of the staff report, in the second paragraph it states "the draft sign code, when approved by the city council, would allow one wall sign for each street upon which the property has frontage, plus one wall sign for each clearly differentiated department." He asked what differentiated department meant? Board member Shankar said an example of a differentiated department is like a Pharmacy sign on the Target building showing different departments in the store. Ms. Finwall said correct. Board member Schurke asked how many departments Best Buy would have? Board member Shankar said he thought Best Buy would need a sign like automotive installation or something of that sort. Board member Schurke asked if there was language in the draft sign code that defines what differentiated department means? Ms. Finwall said no. Board member Schurke asked what street classification meant? He asked if Highway 694 represented a street classification? Ms. Finwall said yes. The draft sign code does not define a street in the sign code. Board member Shankar asked if the 375.4 square foot sign for Best Buy as shown on attachment 4 in the staff report exceeded the allowable square footage for a sign? Ms. Finwall said correct. The draft sign code would only allow for 150 square feet of sign for a building of this size. Board member Shankar said staff recommended one of the Best Buy signs be removed and he asked if that would be for the 375 square foot sign? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 4 Ms. Finwall said that's the size of the sign but not necessarily on that side of the building. Ms. Finwall said this is a good reality check of the proposed draft sign code for the CORBo Chairperson Olson said she sees this is as a unique situation. Because Best Buy has one frontage and two streets and in her opinion this could justify a sign on every side of the building. Board member Shankar said there is really only one street frontage here which is County Road D. Chairperson Olson said she thinks Highway 694 counts as street frontage too. Board member Schurke said he would recommend clarification for the sign code regarding what street designation is. He doesn't necessarily see Highway 694 as street frontage, he sees this as adjacent and not as frontage. He stated his appreciation for Best Buy's very clear plans, which makes it easier for the CDRB to understand what is being proposed. By turning the building with the east facing orientation it almost drives the need for additional signage which may be an advantage for parking. He thinks this is could have too much signage and could be confusing for customers. He doesn't think it's necessary to add the landscaped masonry at the base of the sign. The clean lines of the sign coming out of the ground are fine with him. Knowing if the landscaping would be maintained is a real issue for him. He has often seen landscaping not maintained and it looks better without landscaping. The other issue is a limitation of the hours the signs could be illuminated or hours that the signs could be dimmed because he doesn't see a lot of advertising value illuminating the signs between the hours of 12:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. that could also be electrical savings and energy conservation for Best Buy. These signs could be put on the energy management system. He asked staff if the draft sign code addresses these issues in terms of light levels? Ms. Finwall said the signs are covered in the current lighting ordinance in terms of light glare, however the city does not have a requirement as to when the signs need to be turned off. Board member Schurke said as the sign ordinance comes into its own he would rather see more specificity in the illumination hours. Ms. Finwall said regarding the landscaping of the pylon sign, staff was proposing a brick base around the two existing sign poles with landscaping around the brick and not in the interior of the brick. Staff's proposed condition is based on the fact that this sign is the most visible sign from County Road D. Best Buy is required to install a sidewalk along County Road 0 where pedestrians will be walking by the sign and the brick base and landscaping would help with the aesthetics of the sign. Board member Ledvina said he didn't have any questions for staff. Chairperson Olson asked the applicant to address the board. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 5 Mr. Jason Kraus, Property Development Manager, Best Buy, 7601 Penn Avenue South, Richfield, addressed the board. Mr. Kraus said he wanted to clarify that the sign they are proposing to reface on Highway 694 is exactly the same size of the existing panel. There must be some discrepancy in the report. He had the sign company measure the sign and according to them the 20 foot width is actually 16 feet and should be 160 square feet in size so he isn't sure how the discrepancy in the numbers occurred. He is having a problem with the front wedge or Best Buy sign at 150 square feet. This is a 45,000 square foot store and to have a 150 square foot sign would look very out of proportion. This building is placed on the site in an unusual manner and the visibility for retail space is key here. He would like to stress Best Buy would like to be able to keep the signage they are currently showing on the plan. Regarding the comment about the pylon sign on County Road 0, Best Buy plans on leaving it the way it is. He knows there have been recommendations made to have brick and landscaping for the pylon sign but he appreciates the comments from the board members regarding the problem in keeping the landscaping maintained. The rest of the center is owned by Timco Realty and this Town Center sign is under their control. Board member Shankar said Best Buy opened a new store a few months ago in Oakdale on Radio Drive and he asked how large the sign is for that store? Mr. Kraus said he was not sure of the size of the Best Buy store sign in Oakdale. Board member Shankar asked if Best Buy had any other stores in the Twin Cities with signs that are 375 square feet in size? Mr. Kraus said yes most of the Best Buy store signs are 375 square feet in size. In Eagan they are currently building a Best Buy store that is 45,000 square feet like this store and it will have a sign 375 square feet in size. Board member Shankar asked if Best Buy wants to have a 375 square foot sign on the east side, why do you need the sign on the south side facing County Road D? Mr. Kraus said to catch the traffic driving east on County Road D. Board member Shankar asked why Best Buy would need the sign on the west side? Best Buy would have a pylon sign along Highway 694 that they are refacing so people coming from the frontage road would see that sign. Why would Best Buy need the sign on the west? Mr. Kraus said he noticed when driving on Highway 694 that there are a lot of trees and shrubbery on MnDOT's property and that blocks some of the visibility of Best Buy. Board member Schurke said if Best Buy had to pick from two wall signs which two elevations would Best Buy pick? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 6 Mr. Kraus said that would depend on which sign square footage the CDRB will allow Best Buy to have. He understands this is a draft sign code ordinance and it hasn't been enacted yet. He understands the fact that signage for Best Buy was not approved when the building elevations were reviewed. Now Best Buy finds out the draft sign ordinance has been complete, but theoretically Best Buy is under the existing sign code. Ms. Finwall said that is correct, however, this is a multi-tenant building, therefore it's covered by the city's comprehensive sign plan ordinance which allows the CDRB to make recommendations above or below the existing code to ensure compatibility and a comprehensive plan throughout the center. Mr. Kraus said he hopes the new Best Buy building will help dress this area up. He understands the need for additional aesthetics in this location. The existing Frank's Nursery building is coming down and the parking lot is going to be resurfaced. There is a good possibility that the owner is going to improve this site because of the need to get future tenants in here. Especially because of the new strip mall across the street. Board member Schurke said he understands the draft sign ordinance is a work in progress and he understands Ms. Finwall and the CDRB put a lot of time and effort into the sign ordinance. He asked if staff had thought of using a formula for total sign square footage and let the applicant decide how they would like to allocate this with five smaller signs or one large sign? Ms. Finwall said staff looked at that in the drafting of the sign ordinance. Some cities do that but none of those cities would allow one large 500 square foot sign. Staff felt it would be cumbersome for additional signage as years go by to ensure they are meeting the requirements. If a particular business called the city and asked if they could add an additional sign it would be a matter of researching the existing signs. Board member Schurke asked if Best Buy would be willing to be limited to certain hours that the signs could be illuminated? Mr. Kraus said Best Buy has an energy management system and he believes the sign illumination could be included in that. Board member Schurke asked if the current Best Buy signs are turned off at a certain time now? Mr. Kraus said he would have to check into that. Board member Schurke asked if Best Buy would be willing to limit the hours the signs could be illuminated? Mr. Kraus said he isn't in a position to make that decision. Board member Shankar asked Board member Schurke what hours he was suggesting Best Buy turn the signs off? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 7 Board member Schurke said in some communities such as in Arden Hills there is a sign ordinance that relates specifically to sign height which make for a more interesting way to attract customers to your business as a result of subtle changes in signage that are at street level. Rather than looking up at a sign the sign is at the level that you are driving at which gives a completely different aesthetic to the community because there are no pylon signs. Board member Schurke said he lives close to Keller Lake and when you look up at the night sky it's amazing the dome of light that keeps you from seeing the stars and the problem is getting worse every year with additional development occurring and adding to the light pollution. It would be a good goal to put these types of limitations on so that you aren't needlessly lighting the sky. He feels there is such little traffic driving by at those hours, what would the advertising benefit be to leave the sign lit? Best Buy is a destination business and most people know where the Best Buy stores are located. Mr. Kraus said Best Buy typically runs into lights being on a timer more so with wall sconces and parking lot lighting for night sky ordinances but hasn't had that restriction for lighting of the signage. There are a lot of communities that are using the night sky ordinances. There really isn't a glare problem with signage lighting because most of that light is contained behind the panels and the light is not being directed up or down. Wall sconces have light that can be directed up and down and the parking lot light can be directed down and out. Board member Schurke said the point is that there is a lot of light pollution coming from developments and signage and any lighting causes problems for people looking at the night sky. Chairperson Olson asked if Best Buy had any foot candle data on the omissions that these signs put out? Mr. Kraus said no. Chairperson Olson asked for the purpose of safety would your signage provide any additional lighting that would help with security for pedestrians walking from the Myth nightclub? Mr. Kraus said very little security if any. The street lighting and parking lot lighting would provide more light security for pedestrians. Chairperson Olson said it seems to her the CDRB discussed wall sconce lighting on the side of the building along County Road D. She asked if that had been incorporated into the plan or not? Mr. Kraus said he is not familiar with that. Mr. Paul Anderson, WCL Architects, addressed the board. He said he was at the CDRB meeting last summer when these issues were discussed. He remembered the discussion regarding the wall sconces along the south side, adjacent to the sidewalk. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 8 Mr. Anderson said there are also wall sconces along the east side, which is the front wall and a few along the back of the building on the three piers. Mr. Kraus said a main concern for Best Buy is the amount of light on the site. He said not to stereotype nightclubs but being that the Myth nightclub is across the street, Best Buy is concerned about loss prevention and would prefer the site be well lit. Chairperson Olson said customers at the Myth nightclub are also your potential clients. The club could be an asset for Best Buy located across the street, so things can work both ways. Board member Schurke asked if the wall sconces would be night sky shielded sconces? Mr. Anderson said he would have to check but he thought these were all down lights. Chairperson Olson said she too thought the wall sconces were directing the light downward. Board member Shankar said his opinion is even though the sign code may be for a sign 150 square feet in size that may be too small for a building 45,000 square feet and visually get lost. He believes this building is large enough and the front wall sign should be at least 300 square feet but should be moved higher up on the building than the 16 feet 5% inches in height. He thinks Best Buy should remove the sign on the west side facing Highway 694. He doesn't see how adding the brick on the base of the pylon sign would be a benefit. Board member Ledvina said he agreed with most of the staff recommendations. The new sign code should be used as a basis for evaluating the signs for Best Buy. He would agree with Board member Shankar that the front wall sign should be around 300 square feet but not 375.4 square feet as Best Buy proposed. The staff recommendation is for two wall signs and he doesn't have a preference which sign is removed but he feels the sign on the west side has the smallest value. He would leave that up to the applicant. Regarding the base of the pylon sign on County Road 0, because Best Buy doesn't own that sign that would be difficult to require Best Buy to make changes to the sign. A comment was made that the mall would be getting some type of remodel and maybe at that time the pylon sign with the multi-tenants listed could be updated. Board member Schurke moved to approve the plans date-stamped March 28, 2006, for a comprehensive sign plan amendment for the Town Center Shopping Center located at 1805 County Road D. Approval is subject to the following conditions (changes made to the conditions by the CDRB during the meeting are underlined if added and stricken if deleted): 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a sign permit for the Best Buy store within this time-frame. 2. Best Buy signage shall be limited to: Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 9 a. Three +we wall signs. These wall signs are limited to one 300 sauare foot sian on the east elevation: one 150 sauare foot sian on either the north. south, or west elevations: and one 18 sauare foot sian on the north elevation which advertises the mobile installations,168.2 sql,Jaro feet in area and can be located on any '....all of the building. b. Two freestanding signs as follows: 1) 1-694: One freestanding sign limited to 180 square feet in area and 25 feet in height - Best Buy proposes to use the existing Frank's Nursery freestanding sign located along 1-694. This sign is 128 square feet in area and 25 feet in height. The following conditions to this freestanding sign must be met prior to issuance of any Best Buy sign permits on the property: ~ b) EI1 c) a) If the new sign face exceeds 128 square feet in area, Best Buy must submit certified engineering approval that the existing footings and wind load carrying capacity which meets building code requirements. ~ ^ detailed landscape plan must be submitted which shows landscaping ar-0l,Jnd t!:le base of the sign. All existing Best Buy wall signs located on the old store must be removed once the old Best Buv store is closed. prior to certificate of occupancy of the new Best Buy store. The sign cabinet located on the existing Best Buy freestanding sign at the northeast corner of the Town Center Shopping Center site must be removed once the old Best Buv store is closed. prior to certificate of occupancy of the now Bost Buy storo. 2) County Road 0: The existing Town Center Shopping Center sign will remain. This sign is approximately 25 feet in height and consists of an internally illuminated sign cabinet posted on two steel beams, and advertises four of the main tenants within the center, including Best Buy. The fellowin€l Gonditions to this existing freestandin€l si€ln FRl,Jst ee FRet prior to the issuance of any Best Buy sign permits on the J)r-oporty: ~ Revised olovations of the County Road 0 sign must be subFRitted to staff for appro'lal. Tho elevations FRl,Jst s!:low a four foot hig!:l, or !:Iigher, brick or concreto masonry l,Jnit ease constructed ar-ound the oxisting steel beams. b) 1\ detailoEl lanElscape plan must be sl,Jemittod which shO'...,s landscaping arol,JnEl the base of the sign. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 10 3. All other tenant wall signage shall be limited to: a. Signs composed of a single line of copy shall not exceed three feet in height. b. Signs composed of two lines of copy (stacked) shall not exceed a letter height of 18 inches per line with a maximum space between lines of eight inches, for a total height of 44 inches. If more than two lines of copy are used, the total height shall not exceed 44 inches. c. There must be at lest 18 inches of margin between any sign and the end of the store front. d. All wall signs shall be composed of individual, internally-lit letters, not canister- type signs. e. Tenant wall signage is allowed on both the front and rear elevations. f. Logos are permitted on the sign fascia, but shall not exceed a height of four feet and shall follow the 18-inch spacing requirement. 4. All holes from sign mounting shall be properly patched and painted upon sign removal. 5. The shopping center identification pylon sign shall be located along County Road 0 and be subject to staff approval. 6. Staff may approve minor modifications to the sign plans. Board member Ledvina seconded. Ayes -Ledvina, Olson, Schurke, Shankar The motion passed. The board recommended that Best Buy remove their company sign from the sign panel of the multi-tenant building which would open space up for another tenant on the Town Center sign. b. Sign Code Interpretation - Electronic Reader Boards (7:06 - 8:10 p.m.) Ms. Finwall said city staff is requesting an interpretation of the city's sign code in regard to electronic reader board signs. An electronic reader board is a sign with a fixed or changing display composed of a series of lights that are changed through electronic means. As a planner with the City of Maplewood over the last five years one of staff's responsibilities has been sign code compliance, including the issuing of sign permits. Each year electronic reader board sign requests have increased. Most of these requests include adding electronic reader board signs to existing freestanding signs. This seems to be due to the fact that these types of signs are becoming more affordable to businesses. Plaza TV and Appliance is a new business in Maplewood that moved into an existing building at 1918 Beam Avenue last year. Plaza TV applied for a sign permit that included the addition of an electronic reader board onto the existing freestanding sign. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 11 Staff explained to the sign company that the city prohibits those types of signs based on the interpretation of the sign code. David Motz, the President of Plaza TV and Appliance discussed the matter with staff and indicated that they could program the electronic reader board sign to have a steady and constant message rather than to blink, flash, or flutter. Staff stated that this request has been made in the past, and that staff has denied the requests due to the fact that the sign still has the capability of blinking, flashing, or fluttering. Allowing such signs, in staff's opinion, would become a code enforcement issue if a new manager or owner wasn't aware of the requirement of maintaining the text or image as a steady and constant display. The city would be constantly monitoring those types of signs. Staff indicated to Mr. Motz that the only way staff could issue a sign permit for such a sign is if the city council approved a variance from the sign code. After staff notified Mr. Motz of the variance requirement he submitted a letter to the city further requesting an electronic reader board sign. Mr. Motz's rationale is that they are not looking to vary from the ordinance, only to comply with the ordinance by programming their sign to be constant and steady. Electronic reader boards are designed to advertise products sold within a business, not to advertise the business itself. Many businesses have claimed that they depend on this form of advertisement to make their businesses viable. However, these signs are specifically designed to draw attention away from a motorist or pedestrian, which is a safety hazard. They also add to the constant barrage of advertisements the public experiences on a daily basis. (The Myth nightclub was issued a sign permit during the leave of staff member Shann Finwall.) The difference between this request of Plaza TV and Appliance and the sign at the Myth nightclub is based on the definition of sign types by method of movement. The city's existing sign code defines an animated sign as a sigh which depicts action or movement. However, this definition goes on to specify that the animation term does not refer to flashing, changing or indexing. The code defines a flashing sign as an illuminated sign which contains flashing lights or exhibits noticeable changes in light intensity. In staff's opinion, the Myth's sign is clearly a flashing sign since it has the capability of programming the lights to blink, flash, or flutter, which is prohibited in the city's sign code. An animated sign is not animated by function of its lights, but by function of its movement. An example of an animated sign would be a sign with movable parts, such as a sign depicting a person waving where the arm of a person is moving up and down on the sign. In staff's interpretation of the code the Myth's sign permit was issued in error and the Myth should be required to obtain a variance from the code in order to retain their sign. City staff recommends that the community design review board and city council offer clarification on the city's sign code pertaining to electronic reader board signs. Interpretation questions to be answered include: 1. Should businesses be allowed to install electronic reader board signs on the condition that they keep the text and images steady and constant? 2. Is a state of the art, full color LED sign considered an animated sign or a flashing and blinking sign? If considered a flashing and blinking sign, should the Myth Nightclub be required to obtain a variance to retain their sign, even though the city issued them a sign permit? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 12 3. Is the draft sign code language adequate to address these issues in the future? Chairperson Olson said she is glad this subject came up. She said she has received several complaints in the last month from Maplewood residents regarding the sign at the Myth nightclub. People initially thought the sign was going to be on a few hours a day but the sign is on all the time. She assumed the sign would only be on while the Myth was open but that is not the case. She wondered how this sign made it through the approval process by city staff. She was going to send an e-mail to city staff and then this issue came up in the CDRB packet. She thought she would wait until the discussion came up at the meeting tonight. Chairperson Olson said people driving on Highway 694 see the Myth sign and the motion of the sign and it is very distracting. People driving on White Bear Avenue see the sign as well. There are flames shooting out of people's eyes and many other motions coming from this sign which are very distracting. The sign has already been approved and it's operating so there is not much we can do about it now but she would like to require the Myth to only have still images on the sign because when the sign is in motion it is very distracting. She said the city cannot keep electronic reader board signs out of the City of Maplewood any longer. These types of signs exist in the community and the request is going to continue to come in for those types of signs. Board member Shankar said the city has the right to say electronic reader board signs are not allowed in Maplewood. Chairperson Olson said she doesn't think that is reasonable. Board member Schurke agreed with Board member Shankar. He sees electronic reader board signs as eye pollution. Board member Shankar said he can see electronic reader board signs for buildings that cater to large groups of people like Aldrich Arena, Xcel Energy Center, etc. but he doesn't feel it's necessary to have an electronic reader board for a small business such as Plaza TV and Appliance. Other appliance stores don't require electronic reader boards to conduct business. Chairperson Olson disagrees, she thinks there are two different kinds of electronic reader board signs here. The Plaza TV representatives are requesting a small electronic reader board sign similar to the electronic sign on the Premier Bank building at the corner of White Bear Avenue and Lydia Avenue. They are not requesting a color electronic reader board sign or anything fancy. She said this is an electronic reader board sign that would contain text only. Board member Schurke said staff displayed a picture of the Plaza TV sign on the overhead screen with an electronic reader board sign shown already. He asked if that was a computer generated photo or has the electronic reader board sign already been installed? Ms. Finwall said that was a computer generated photo to represent what the sign would look like with the electronic reader board beneath the Plaza TV sign. Board member Shankar said he is concerned about what an electronic reader board sign would include. He asked if there would be animation, four different colors of text, or what? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 13 Chairperson Olson said the text should be constant and steady and not blinking or fluttering and that is all we as a board should be concerned about. Board member Shankar asked as a city how do we enforce that? Chairperson Olson asked how does the city enforce anything? There is a business in Maplewood at the corner of County Road C and White Bear Avenue that has 100% paint covered windows that still say "under new ownership" that has been there for 2 years now and the city hasn't enforced any regulations on that business. Chairperson Olson said by stating the sign parameters and requiring the owners to recognize the rules there shouldn't be any problems with signs in Maplewood. Board member Shankar said an electronic reader board sign is basically a television to him. Chairperson Olson said she disagrees with that statement. It's different when you are talking about text on a sign. Board member Shankar asked if Plaza TV would have the ability to change the text on the sign and flash an image as well? Chairperson Olson said Plaza TV should be able to change the text on the sign but should not be flashing images in any way. The electronic reader board sign for Premier Bank is very similar to what Plaza TV is proposing to have. The sign at the bank has scrolling words that have a series of community announcements. Ms. Finwall said just to clarify, the electronic reader board sign associated with the bank for time and temperature and public service messages are currently allowed in the existing sign code. This is a good example of code enforcement issues with that type of sign. The bank is advertising loan rates in addition to public service announcements so they are not using the sign for all the correct reasons. There are a few electronic reader board signs in the city that were approved with special approval by the city council like Aldrich Arena and a few signs that were approved years ago prior to the sign code and one or two signs with a different interpretation of the sign code, prior to her employment with the city. Chairperson Olson said when the CDRB was discussing the sign code ordinance the board discussed allowing gas stations to have electronic signs so it would be easier to change the price on the sign as opposed to taking vinyl magnetic numbers on and off. This is the right time to allow electronic reader board signs in Maplewood. As long as the signs are not flashing and fluttering it seems to be the appropriate thing to do. Ms. Finwall said staff has allowed electronic gas pricing signs because they are steady and constant. Staff's concern with electronic reader board signs is that they advertise a product within the business and not the business itself. A good example of that is the electronic reader board at Walgreen's in St. Paul at the corner of Larpenteur Avenue and White Bear Avenue where they have sales advertised scrolling across the screen. She personally sees that as eye pollution. Chairperson Olson asked the applicant to address the board. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 14 Mr. David Motz, President, Plaza TV and Appliance, 1918 Beam Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the board. He said this is a family owned business, they have two locations, the other location is in West St. Paul at South Robert Street, the previous location was at White Bear Avenue in St. Paul and they have since moved to their new location at 1918 Beam Avenue in July. Plaza TV said they want to follow the city sign code and will keep the electronic message constant or steady. They are a small business and they don't have the advertising budget that other companies have. That is why they want to have an electronic reader board sign to draw customers into their store. Mr. Motz said at the present time the West St. Paul store has a sign with the white board where you manually put magnetic letters and numbers on and off with a pole. They have had that for 10 years now. It's a real hindrance to have that kind of system. The wind blows things off the sign, the fluorescent bulbs have to be changed, the sign looks messy, and it is hard for the employees to go out and change the advertising on the sign. They are proposing to have an electronic reader board sign underneath the Plaza TV and Appliance sign, it would look more professional and is more energy efficient. Plaza TV spent a lot of money to move into this building in Maplewood and they want a decent sign out front to match their building. With the interpretation of the sign code he doesn't see why they can't have an electronic reader board sign if they follow the rules and doesn't see why they should have to apply for a variance. He said if the city informed people that if they get a permit for an electronic reader board sign and if they don't follow the city guidelines they could be fined for breaking the city ordinance. Mr. Motz said the city could place a fine such as $5,000 for breaking the rule. Most business owners aren't going to want to pay a fine like that and that would keep them from straying from the rules. It would really benefit Plaza TV if the city would grant them this electronic reader board sign. Board member Shankar asked what type of advertisement Plaza TV would have on this electronic reader board sign? Mr. Bob Sherlock, sign installer for Sign Art Company, 2170 Dodd Road, Mendota Heights, addressed the board. He said the electronic reader board sign would advertise products for Plaza TV and Appliance. This electronic sign would be a two line message board and would allow for two lines of text. The sign has the capability in the graphics software to animate, flash, rotate and do full graphics, although this sign is not a full color display sign like the Myth nightclub sign. Because of the reduced height and the size of the face it is not real high and it does not have the square footage capability to adequately present graphics on it. This is a low watt energy efficient sign with LED pixels. These aren't electronic bulbs with sockets. The graphic software can hold the same message for 1 year. The idea was to hold a specific message for at least 1 day. Chairperson Olson asked if the electronic reader board sign would be advertising products or would it be used to state the time and temperature like Premier Bank uses their sign? Mr. Motz said at times the sign could advertise the time and temperature but the sign would be more for advertising the product and the services they could give the customer. Chairperson Olson asked if Plaza TV felt they couldn't advertise the business through window advertising or other signs like what they use at their West St. Paul location? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 15 Mr. Motz said this building is set back a ways off of Beam Avenue because of the frontage road that separates Beam Avenue and Plaza TV. Window advertising would not be effective being that there business is set back off the road. If the city allows a sign like the one at the KFC restaurant that doesn't look very professional, why wouldn't the city allow Plaza TV to have a more professional, more modern looking sign? Board member Shankar asked if the sign would be double sided? Mr. Sherlock said yes. Board member Shankar asked if the sign would have the same message on both sides of the sign? Mr. Sherlock said he would have to check on the specifics of this particular sign to see the ability of the sign. Some signs are automatically displayed with the same message on both sides and others can be programmed to read different text on each side of the sign if they have two different computer systems. Chairperson Olson asked if Plaza TV has an existing pylon sign now? Mr. Motz said they refaced the existing pylon sign from the previous business. Mr. Sherlock said the sign could be programmed to change the text message at any time as often as Mr. Motz would like. Mr. Motz said their current sign turns off at 2:00 a.m. and turns back on at 5:00 or 6:00 a.m. Mr. Sherlock said he has been working with signs since 1980. Most commercial businesses will provide a photo cell on the sign with a timer combination to turn the sign off late at night and turn it back on early in the morning. Board member Shankar asked how Plaza TV felt if the city required them to only change the text once a week on Sundays? Mr. Motz said that probably wouldn't be a problem. Ms. Finwall said if the city started to allow electronic reader board signs how would the city be able to ensure the signs weren't being changed too often or what the signs are reflecting? Board member Schurke recommended disallowing electronic reader boards in the current and proposed sign code in the City of Maplewood. Board member Schurke moved to deny the use of an electronic reader board sign for Plaza TV and Appliance at 1918 Beam Avenue. Board member Ledvina seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Schurke Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 16 Nay - Olson Abstention - Shankar This item will go to the city council on May 8, 2006. Chairperson Olson said she would like to discuss this topic again at the next CDRB meeting. Ms. Finwall said the CDRB could also discuss the second part of question 2 and all of question 3 shown in the staff report at a later date as well. Chairperson Olson asked if the only option Plaza TV and Appliance has is to apply for a variance for the electronic reader board sign? Ms. Finwall said yes. Chairperson Olson asked if the variance fee is $1,000 as the applicant stated in their letter? Ms. Finwall said off hand she was not sure of the exact fee for a variance. The applicant would be able to go to the city council meeting on May 8, 2006; the decision by the CDRB is only a recommendation to the city council. The city council makes the final decision. If the city council agrees with the recommendation by the CDRB the applicant has the option to apply for a variance at that time. Chairperson Olson asked staff what the options are for the Myth nightclub and the sign that has already been installed. She asked if the city can ask the Myth to take the sign down? Ms. Finwall said this is an unfortunate situation for the city to be in. The planner that gave the sign approval contacted the Myth as the sign was being installed and asked what type of messages would be shown on the screen and what types of graphics would be displayed on the screen because the city was struggling with the sign interpretation. The owners of the Myth indicated they would have some public service messages, but mostly they would advertise upcoming events at the club If the city does not enforce the sign code, the code is unenforceable. Ms. Finwall said so regardless of how the sign was approved, the city has to address this sign and should require a variance. The hardship may be that the city issued them a permit, therefore, the Myth should be allowed to keep this sign, however the city could require additional conditions such as the message has to remain constant and steady, and the sign has to be turned off at a certain time or something like that. Chairperson Olson said she is sympathetic to Plaza TV and Appliance. They were only asking for two lines of text on an electronic reader board sign compared to the Myth's huge video sign. Board member Ledvina said as far as the Myth is concerned this does not meet the requirements of the sign code so whatever actions the CORB needs to take to correct this is appropriate. If the CDRB is going to look at the city's options we need to take the best course of action. The city can't ignore this situation. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 17 Board member Shankar said to answer question number 2 in the recommendations on page 5 of the staff report he answered yes to both questions. I n his opinion a state of the art, full color LED sign is considered a flashing and blinking sign. Board member Schurke said he read the statement on page 4 of the staff report that says The city's existing sign code defines an animated sign as a sign which depicts action or movement. He understood the Sign Art representative for Plaza TV and Appliance to say the sign could have two lines of text that could depict action or movement by programming the sign that way. To him this is a sticky situation to define animation separate from flashing or fluttering. Board member Schurke said if the sign code text isn't clear enough we need to make it clear so there are no gaps in the sign code and mistakes aren't made. He asked if there is a rating requirement regarding animation on these signs? He said Chairperson Olson made a comment that flames were coming out of people's eyes on the Myth nightclub sign. Are there certain content guidelines that the applicants can follow so they don't cross the line? He said he has three young children and he wouldn't want to drive by this sign and have his children see certain things on the sign that may be offensive. Board member Schurke said to him the issue of policing these electronic reader board signs seems like it could potentially evolve into complaints from the community. What about the potential litigation the city could be exposed to in terms of car accidents as a result of a distracting sign such as the sign the Myth has. He thinks this is going to open the City of Maplewood up to potential lawsuits if someone has a car accident because of the distracting animation of the Myth sign. He asked if this was a potential problem in other cities. Chairperson Olson said she doesn't think the sign at the Myth is that crazy. She mentioned that she received comments from people regarding the Myth nightclub sign and the distraction from your peripheral vision, the content of the sign and the images that were portrayed. She isn't sure the city will have potential lawsuit issues here. She is concerned however, that the other planner approved this sign while Shann was on leave. The Myth sign is approved, it's up and working for 3 months now and we have to deal with it. Board member Ledvina said now the city has to evaluate what the best options are for dealing with the Myth sign. Now we have to find out what the city can ask the Myth to do regarding the situation. Board member Schurke moved to recommend disallowing the use of LED signs in the City of Maplewood. Board member Shankar asked if an animated sign is allowed by the sign code? Ms. Finwall said under the current sign code an animated sign is allowed and it is defined as a sign which depicts action or movement, however the definition does go on to specify the animation term does not refer to flashing, changing or indexing. The city prohibits any type of flashing or blinking. Board member Shankar said the new sign code should prohibit animated, flashing and blinking signs. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 18 Ms. Finwall said the only animated sign she knows of in Maplewood is at the Holiday store at Century Avenue and 10th. There is an auto repair business there and the sign spins around. An animated sign is a sign that spins or moves around. It's not the "movements" on the sign like an action on a television or video screen. Board member Ledvina referred to an animated sign to be like the barber shop sign where the red, white, and blue striped sign spins in a circle. Chairperson Olson recommended additional discussion regarding this section of the sign code to clear these issues up for the future. Ms. Finwall said it's imperative that the city council has the recommendation of the CDRB on the Myth sign. Chairperson Olson said this makes it difficult to work on these issues without a more clear and concise definition of the sign code from the city attorney. She thinks this discussion should be tabled because there are too many issues that are undefined. Chairperson Olson said regarding the questions on page 5 of the staff report, she answered yes to question number 1, yes to question number 2 and it is considered an animated sign or a flashing and blinking sign and they should not be allowed. Regarding question number 3, she thinks the CDRB needs to address the sign code on these issues more specifically. Board member Ledvina said you can call them big TV screens, flashing signs, animated signs, or whatever, either way they are not allowed in Maplewood. Ms. Finwall thought it was important to have a motion regarding question number 2. for the Myth nightclub. Board member Schurke moved that the existing sign code disallows LED signs and flashing and blinking signs such as the Myth night club sign. Board member Ledvina seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Olson, Schurke, Shankar The motion passed. Chairperson Olson said when this comes back for discussion she would like to see these two issues broken down into two different categories. She doesn't see electronic reader board signs like the request from Plaza TV and Appliance in the same category as an outdoor TV screen with action and movement like the Myth sign. Ms. Finwall said because this is something new in Maplewood she believes it warrants different definitions. She will draft specific language regarding electronic reader boards and outdoor TV signs and bring this back to the CDRB at a future meeting. Chairperson Olson asked if staff could bring additional information back from the city attorney with recommendations on how to handle the Myth nightclub sign? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 19 Board member Ledvina said he wasn't sure this was anything the CDRB could deal with. He thought this was something city staff would have to deal with. This sign at the Myth is an enforcement issue and is out of the realm of the CDRB. Chairperson Olson respectively disagreed. The CDRB is an advisory group to the city council regarding the sign code and she believes this falls into the board's view. The CDRB should make a recommendation to the city council on this issue. She didn't think she could come up with the appropriate language tonight. She asked if the city recommends the Myth remove the large electronic reader board sign? Do we recommend that the sign be relocated so it's not near the roadway? Do we ask that the sign be mounted on the building instead of as a pylon sign near the road? Ms. Finwall said if the city council decides that type of sign should not have been allowed for the Myth and that the Myth should obtain a variance the CDRB would review this item again. Chairperson Olson said because the Myth sign exists already, would the variance be approved? Ms. Finwall said a variance should be approved based on hardship and she thinks it's a hardship to have a sign this size and value approved and installed and then for the city to say you have to take it down. Chairperson Olson said it seems incredibly unfair for surrounding businesses in Maplewood to see the Myth sign exist and then the city tells applicants they can't have an electronic reader board sign with two lines of text as requested by Plaza TV. Board member Schurke said regarding the topic of electronic reader board signage, the role of the CDRB is to guard the aesthetics in the City of Maplewood. The contrast between a white board with magnetic letters and numbers on it and an electronic reader board sign both equal eye pollution to him and he would prefer not to see either of them. But the city has a history of things that were already approved. Now the city has to decide what to do now that the Myth sign has been approved and what can the city do about it now. He would prefer not to spend more time discussing electronic signs. Chairperson Olson said she would respectively disagree. She would like to see clarifications made to the existing and proposed sign code. Ms. Finwall said staff will bring proposed language back to the CDRB to help clarify these items in the proposed draft sign code because staff believes this warrants clarification and this can be discussed at a future CDRB meeting. Board member Shankar said keep in mind that any backlit static sign like the Best Buy sign is also considered an electronic sign. Chairperson Olson said if the images were "still" on the electronic sign at the Myth that might be acceptable. Right now there is a tremendous amount of movement on the Myth sign. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 20 VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS a. Special City Council Meeting, April 18, 2006, Gladstone Redevelopment Concept Plan Chairperson Olson said the meeting was held at the Maplewood Community Center in the theatre and began around 6:30 p.m. The Maplewood residents spoke first, and then the different boards and commissions spoke. No decisions or recommendations were made by the city council. The Master Plan for 800 units was recommended, there was a report for a majority vote by three members of the PC for between 600-700 units. The Gladstone residents preferred the 400 unit plan. The city council decided they would need to have a retreat to make a final decision and weigh the information the city council received regarding the Gladstone Redevelopment Plan. b. Open space clean up discussion Board member Schurke said he is aware of at least two open space parcels that the City of Maplewood owns, both of which are in need of minor clean up. He isn't sure if there is environmental clean up needed but there is visual contamination on these properties with debris left over from when these parcels were purchased. At the April 18, 2006, Gladstone meeting AI Singer spoke about the open space in Maplewood. Board member Schurke said he was surprised there were no funds set aside for clean up of open space in Maplewood. He lives near one of the parcels at the intersection of Roselawn Avenue and Arcade Street where there is debris and he has heard complaints from Maplewood residents. The other parcel is on the east side of Maplewood and the parcel has barrels and other things on the property. He thinks it would be a good effort on the part of Maplewood to clean up those parcels. With future developments in Maplewood the city could earmark funds to save money to do maintenance on open space properties in Maplewood. He is not sure how to handle this recommendation or who it should be passed on to but he recommends funding be set aside to do this clean up. Chairperson Olson said this was a huge area of discussion for the Gladstone Redevelopment task force. She would recommend that Board member Schurke contact the Open Space Committee and Parks Commission on his own. She didn't know what the final recommendation was regarding the clean up. That was one of the reasons the issue regarding the sale of the Savanna kept coming back. One of the proposals was for funds from the sale of the Savanna could then be funneled in to create a permanent endowment for the parks and open space. That did not go over very well but this issue has been discussed several times. Ms. Finwall said the city does fund some maintenance and upkeep through the city's park access charge (PAC) which is a park charge on all new home building permits in the City of Maplewood. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-25-2006 21 Ms. Finwall said the city council recently approved the (PAC) fee to be raised, because it had not been raised in many years. There just isn't a specific clean up fund for open space. The city's naturalist and environmental person are looking at all the options for grants regarding open space in the City of Maplewood. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Board member Shankar will represent the CDRB at the May 8, 2006, city council meeting - Items to be discussed include the Sign Code Interpretation and Electronic Reader Boards b. Planning Commission and CDRB Responsibilities and Duties - Possible Meeting Ms. Finwall said this item was placed on the agenda based on conversations between a planning commissioner and a board member and the overlapping of discussion items at their meetings. Chairperson Olson said this came up in the annual report to the city council. One of the items the CDRB would discuss in the upcoming year would be to review the parking regulations. Chairperson Olson said in a discussion with a planning commissioner they said they would also be discussing that. She volunteered to go to a planning commission meeting to discuss what the CDRB reviews for parking. She would like someone from the PC to discuss with the CDRB what the PC reviews for parking. Ms. Finwall wasn't sure what the final decision was at the PC meeting. The recording secretary said she thought staff was going to compile a list of items the PC had concerns about asked if city staff for the CDRB could do the same. Then the two chairpersons could have a separate meeting to discuss the items rather than trying to get a joint meeting together between the PC and the CDRB. Ms. Finwall said she would follow up on this and bring it back to the CDRB at a later date. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MAY 9,2006 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Board member John Hinzman Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina Chairperson Linda Olson Board member Joel Schurke Board member Ananth Shankar Present until 6:40 p.m. Absent Present Present Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Hinzman moved to approve the agenda. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes - Hinzman, Olson, Schurke, Shankar The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for April 25, 2006 Chairperson Olson moved to table the approval of the minutes of April 25, 2006, until the next meeting. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes _n Hinzman, Olson, Schurke, Shankar The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Comforts of Home Assisted Living Facility - 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street Ms. Finwall said Mathew Frisbie of Frisbie Architects, Inc., representing Comforts of Home is proposing to redevelop two lots located on the southeast corner of Highway 36 and Hazelwood Street (2300 and 2310 Hazelwood Street). The two lots currently contain the vacant Auto Glass store and an electrical contractor's office. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 2 The proposed use on the 3.025 acre lot will be a 42-unit, two-story, assisted living facility. The facility will also include memory care, respite care, and a hospice facility with 24-hour, on-site homecare staff. The planning commission recommended approval of the comprehensive land use plan change and conditional use permit at their May 1, 2006, meeting. The community design review board should make a recommendation on the design elements of the project including architectural, site plan, landscaping, and lighting. Ms. Finwall distributed a revised grading and drainage plan to the CDRB that staff received on May 8, 2006. Chairperson Olson said she read there was neighborhood opposition to this proposal based on the potential traffic in the area which would require the city to upgrade Hazelwood Avenue. Staff said Hazelwood Avenue was to be upgraded in 2009, she asked if that road was already on the city's long range schedule for reconstruction or was it added to the construction schedule because of this proposal? Ms. Finwall said Hazelwood Avenue was on the city's road construction calendar to be reconstructed in 2009 before this proposal came forward. Chairperson Olson asked if the sidewalk for Comforts of Home would be deferred until 2009 because of the road improvement project? Ms. Finwall said the city's engineering department felt it best to have the developer submit an escrow for the sidewalk rather than build it right away. If the city required the developer to install the sidewalk now the city may find out it did not meet the design standards and the sidewalk would have to be removed and replaced in 2009. Chairperson Olson asked if that was correct then the road assessments would not be charged to the homeowners until 2009? Ms. Finwall said that's correct as proposed in the city's capital improvement plan. Board member Shankar asked if there would be staff working in this facility such as dining staff? Ms. Finwall said there would be full time employees working at Comforts of Home. During the day there would be 5 to 6 employees and in the evening they would have about 3 employees. Board member Shankar asked if 25 parking stalls would be sufficient based on that count? Ms. Finwall said because none of the residents would have vehicles, the only parking that would be needed is for visitors and the employees. Comforts of Home said this type of parking has worked at their other locations and they are confident the parking would be sufficient for their needs at this site. The parking was discussed at length during the Planning Commission meeting on May 1, 2006. The parking reduction was included as part of the PUD which was reviewed and recommended for approval by the PC. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 3 Board member Shankar asked if the residents would be transported by a van? Where would the van park? Where would the van pick up the residents? He did not see a wide enough parking stall on the parking plan. Ms. Finwall said there is a drive aisle. In the event the transportation van picks the residents up they could park the van in front of the building. Board member Schurke asked staff about the recommendation to change the Colorado blue spruce plantings to Black hills spruce on the landscaping plan? He asked if Black hills spruce was native to Minnesota or what was the rationale for the change? Ms. Finwall said the experience in Maplewood has been that the Colorado blue spruce tree gets a fungus and doesn't last as long in Minnesota. Board member Schurke asked if the recommendation for the 6 to 8 foot high berm was primarily for noise mitigation from Highway 36? Ms. Finwall said the engineering department recommended the berm for noise mitigation, but it will also add a nice visual buffer from Highway 36 as well. Board member Schurke asked if the noise study or documentation had been done yet for this site? Ms. Finwall said that information would be required prior to issuance of a building permit. That information could come after the fact as well. The developer would also be using building materials that are for noise reduction such as thicker walls, windows, and insulation. Board member Hinzman asked about the revised grading and drainage plan and if that satisfied the staff's concern about the additional berm height along Highway 36? It appears some areas of the berm are only 3 feet in height. Ms. Finwall said the revised grading and drainage plan was received by staff on Monday, May 8, 2006, and staff has not had the opportunity to have the engineering department review this. Staff would have to verify that. Chairperson Olson said she watched the broadcast of the Planning Commission meeting on Monday, May 1, 2006, and remembered there was quite a bit of discussion regarding the berm. She asked if that information was included in the packet? Ms. Finwall said the only thing that was included in the packet was the recommendation that the berm be 6 to 8 feet in height. Board member Schurke said that recommendation is shown in the staff report on page 10, item 2. b. Board member Schurke asked if Comforts of Home owns the island for Knuckle Head Lake? The applicant shook his head no that they do not own the island for Knuckle Head Lake. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 4 Chairperson Olson asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Mathew Frisbie, Frisbie Architects, 215 North 2nd Street, Suite 204, River Falls, Wisconsin, addressed the board. Mr. Brian Winges, Owner of Comforts of Home, 2340 County Road J East, White Bear Township, addressed the board. Mr. Winges said Comforts of Home serves the needs of residents who need a lot of care. The residents would not be picked up and driven to a shopping center for example because these are people that need help with getting dressed, bathing, and sometimes assistance with eating. Family members may come and take their loved one to the doctor or out for the day, but that would be about it. The parking requirements are sufficient. Chairperson Olson asked if they would anticipate having gatherings such as a Mothers Day tea in the future? The reason she asked is because this would bring a lot of visitors and she wondered where those people would park. Mr. Winges said they do not hold large functions or parties at Comforts of Home facilities. The issue of gatherings and parking needs was addressed with the planning commission. They don't have the ability to have a large gathering here. The commons area is geared to a home- like setting; there is no large dining room or anything like that. People are welcome to visit their loved one anytime, Mothers Day, Christmas, or Thanksgiving but there is no large gatherings scheduled for people to come all on one day. This is a very acute population and it can be difficult to even get the residents mobile. Chairperson Olson asked how many employees there would be? Mr. Winges said they would have about 5 to 6 daytime employees and around 3 employees in the evening. They have what is called a universal employee where they do all the functions that are needed and move from one function to the other. They do not have a separate food staff, cleaning staff, and nursing staff. This allows them a sufficient number of employees that keep busy throughout the three shifts. Sometimes a manager stops in occasionally so that may be an additional car in the parking lot; otherwise the parking needs are very similar from location to location. Chairperson Olson said that doesn't sound like many employees to care for 42 residents; especially depending on their care needs and only having 3 staff members at night. Mr. Winges said those numbers are actually above the industry average. Some facilities only have 1 staff member for 60 residents. Chairperson Olson asked if the meals would be cooked on site or delivered to the facility? Mr. Winges said the meals would be cooked on site; they try to have home cooked style meals. Chairperson Olson asked where delivery vehicles would be making deliveries? Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 5 Mr. Mark Paschke, Frisbie Architects, addressed the board. He said the drop off area would be off of Hazelwood Avenue. There is a secondary exit directly off of the kitchen and that is where most of the deliveries would occur on site. There would be two food deliveries per week. There would also be a walk-in freezer and refrigerator which would allow for less food deliveries. Chairperson Olson asked if there would be a laundry pick up and delivery service? Mr. Winges said the laundry is done in-house for the residents by the employees so there would be no laundry deliveries. The cost of the laundry service is included in the monthly living expenses. Chairperson Olson said it sounds like there would be minimal delivery trucks coming to this facility. Mr. Winges said yes, that is correct and that is another reason the Comforts of Home have built in residential neighborhoods. They have always been concerned about traffic and things of that nature. They have designed the building with that in mind and that is the way the building is staffed. The laundry is done individually. Residents have their own sheets and their own clothes. The laundry is not all dumped together and washed together. It's done individually. Board member Shankar asked if there is an outdoor space in the back of the facility? Mr. Winges said yes. Board member Shankar said it appears there is a large grade drop there. He asked if they are concerned about that? Mr. Frisbee said there is a fence and guard rail system on both levels. Mr. Paschke said that is represented as A4 in the staff report and identifies the guard rail at both levels. Mr. Winges said the residents would go outside and sit down and enjoy the weather. They would not be outside walking or hiking so it is not a problem to have a gated sitting area. Mr. Paschke said there is a third outdoor space on the front of the building on the south side for the memory care patients. Chairperson Olson asked if there is a separate locked area for the Alzheimer's patients or will their individual units be secured? Mr. Winges said there is a separate eating and activity area for the Alzheimer's patients. Depending on the number of memory or Alzheimer's patients they do have the ability to lock certain areas of the building. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 6 Board member Hinzman said this is a great looking facility and this is going to be a nice addition to this site. On the southeast corner of the building is a 30-inch oak tree that is about 10 feet off the building site and is proposed to be eliminated. He asked if there would be a way to save that tree? Mr. Frisbee said he would have to look into that. They have adjusted the building to the south to meet other requirements but they will check into the proximity of the oak tree. If there is a way to shift the building to preserve the tree they will see what they can do. Chairperson Olson said in looking at the grading and erosion control plan she was wondering if they were proposing underground drainage from the rainwater garden into the wetland? Mr. Frisbee said typically with a rainwater garden it's for pretreatment of the storm water so they catch all the sediment and at some point there would be an overflow. They would then be allowed to overflow into the wetland area so they can take a look at that. Chairperson Olson asked if it would still be permeable? Mr. Frisbee said yes. Mr. Paschke said that would be addressed through the permit with the watershed district. They want the overflow spillway taken to the wetland basin to avoid any erosion of the hillside. Board member Hinzman said the 6 to 8 foot high berm appears to be very tight on the site plan. He asked what the thoughts were regarding the engineering recommendation for the 6 to 8 foot high berm? Mr. Paschke said they are working with the Maplewood City Engineer, Michael Thompson, regarding maximizing the berm where they can. With the addition of planting the trees, the steeper you get that berm the greater the risk you have of freezing your trees out. They are doing what they can to make that work. Board member Hinzman asked if they are cutting the site down much in this location? The reason he asked is if the site is lower than the berm could be lower. Mr. Frisbee said they are matching the elevations of Hazelwood Avenue so that blends in. Hazelwood Avenue is at 919 and slopes down to 918 at the parking lot and back up to 918.75 at the first floor of the building. The northeast corner of the property has a few higher spots for a higher berm. Board member Schurke said he agrees with the comments made by Board member Hinzman that this is a very nicely designed proposal, he was happy to see such quality building materials being used. He said it appears the floor plan is flipped on the elevations. Mr. Paschke said the color rendering presented tonight is a project under construction in White Bear Lake. This plan is a mirror of the project being built in White Bear Lake so it is reversed on the plan. Chairperson Olson asked if they had building samples to show the board? Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 7 Mr. Frisbee presented samples of some of the materials they would be using on this project while Mr. Paschke passed a colored board around to each of the board members representing their Hudson, Wisconsin building. Board member Schurke asked if the applicant was aware of the energy design assistance program for Xcel customers in Minnesota which they may qualify for. He said this program could save your facility a substantial amount of money. The utility rebates are based on the improvements on the buildings from an energy quality standpoint relative to a cash rebate from the utility. Perhaps the architect is already aware of this program. Mr. Frisbee said they have not been a part of that program for this proposal but he would have to take a closer look at this to see if this would qualify for it. Board member Schurke said the plans do not call out the R values for the building materials being used on this project and he asked about each of the R values. He said he noticed they are using CMU block construction. He asked if they had thought about using insulated concrete forms. That may be something to look into for the sound continuation potential for that kind of product he said. Another product that gets sound continuation is instructional insulated panel systems. Knowing there are sound issues that are being driven for residential issues he would have concerns about the aesthetics regarding the berm along Highway 36. He would like to see more of this building from Highway 36 because of the nice design features. He asked if the owner thought how the building could be converted to another use if there is no longer a market for this type of use? Mr. Paschke said the structure would be completely non-combustible construction which is the most restricted construction available. It is fully sprinklered. This type of facility allows clientele to age in place and if the care becomes more acute at some point the owner could upgrade their license and go with more of a skilled nursing facility. As far as changing the building to another residential occupancy that would be tied to the PUD and that would have to be reviewed by the city. Structurally it's an 1-2 construction class. Fire resistant ratings and safety issues are of the utmost importance in this type of a facility, especially for residents that are unable to respond to emergency situations on their own. Mr. Winges said he works with developers who said this building could be converted to office condominiums. His understanding is that this building is adaptable, it would cost some money to change things, but it could be done. Mr. Winges said they have never had a problem with filling rooms at any of their buildings. Their buildings fill up in a matter of months and they are very confident with the demand for this type of facility. Board member Schurke said he applauds the quality standard that they reach for with Comforts of Home. This stands out above a lot of other types of facilities he has toured. He said his mother is in this age bracket but she does not require this type of facility yet but this outranks any other buildings he has seen quality wise. Mr. Winges thanked him for his comments. Chairperson Olson agreed with the comments regarding the quality of the design. This building is going to fill up fast because there is a need for this type of housing. She did not notice a space dedicated for large muscle activities. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 8 Mr. Winges said there is not a lot of exercise going on because of the type of resident they care for. They don't have a need for a large exercise area. They do have daily activities which are held in the common areas. Chairperson Olson asked if a large part of their clientele use wheelchairs or walkers? Mr. Winges said there are a fair number that do. The mobility problem is not something you would find in a typical assisted living home such as Presbyterian Homes, Alterra or Sunrise. They are taking the elderly residents that those types of facilities won't accept but are not ready or don't need to move to a nursing home. He would welcome the CDRB to visit their locations to see what type of residents they care for and what their facilities look like. The residents do get light exercise. Chairperson Olson asked if there would be elevators in this facility. Mr. Winges said yes. Mr. Frisbee showed a building sample board to the board and said they would use a 40-year architectural shingle, a Hardy cement plank siding painted with two colors along with white trim, reddish toned brick, and arts and crafts style lighting. Chairperson Olson said Alzheimer patients can be very clever and she asked if they anticipate residents trying to escape from the building? Mr. Winges said they have had a lot of experience with residents trying to escape the buildings. Comforts of Home has gotten pretty good at anticipating people trying to escape and keeping a close eye on those individuals. They do their best to design the building so that it's very difficult for the patients to get out. Staff does not have the man power to continually keep a resident from trying to leave the building. It's stated in the resident's lease that if they continue to leave the facility they will have to move to more of a lock down facility such as a nursing home. Board member Schurke asked if they could review the R values for the building materials they will be using for this facility. Mr. Paschke said the walls would have R-19 walls with 6-inch steel studs and 6-inches of batting insulation, 4-inch veneer occurs at the cultured stone base that comes up 40 inches and gives a backing to apply the stone veneer, the brick sits on top of that, the roof is R-40, he wasn't sure of the E-value for the window. Mr. Frisbee said they would use Eagle windows which are high quality windows. He would have to check on the E-value of the window. MnDOT would have certain requirements on the side of the building facing Highway 36. Board member Schurke asked how the facility would be heated? Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 9 Mr. Frisbee said there is a series of forced air units throughout the building, multiple zones, and a variety of smaller units rather than a larger package unit so they have more control over the buildings. The main floor has in-floor heat and forced air on the second floor and ventilation for the first floor. Board member Shankar asked if they would have one elevator as you would enter the building? Mr. Paschke said yes. Board member Shankar thought an elevator that is 3' X 6' is hardly enough room for a wheelchair to fit inside. Mr. Paschke said that is a gurney approved emergency sized elevator cab. Chairperson Olson asked what the emergency plan was for the residents in the second floor if there are no egress windows? Mr. Winges said typically he would have his operations person speak regarding the emergency plan but she was unable to attend the meeting tonight. The evacuation plan is run through the state since assisted living facilities are licensed through the State of Minnesota. They also coordinate things through the Fire Chief for emergencies as well. Board member Shankar asked if they would consider making the entire front curb handicapped zero curb rather than just a five foot section being zero curb? Mr. Frisbee said they could look at that with their civil engineer but when they get to a zero curb if the drainage for that area is not set correctly there can be ponding and icing but they could look into that. With a smaller curb cut they can control water and where it is directed a lot better. Board member Shankar said he brings the issue up because he is concerned about the resident's safety having a curb to step up or down from. He said it is safer to have a flat surface for them to walk up and off of. Mr. Frisbee said their Hudson, Wisconsin facility has four steps to enter the building so when there are deliveries at that location the people have to go up four steps to enter the building. At this facility he imagines delivery trucks would pull right up to the curb, take out their two wheeler and make the delivery. The curb actually protects the building from vehicles that would get too close to the building itself with zero curb. Board member Schurke said he didn't notice this before but the trash enclosure doorway faces the line of traffic. He asked if they could rotate it to the north and west and have it open to the south and east. This could also help save an additional parking space. Board member Paschke said perhaps the city would accept that in lieu of having the berm? Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 10 Board member Schurke said he would prefer not to see a continuous line of trees on the berm along Highway 36. The lesson he learned from a landscape architect was to plant things in an odd number and you never plant things in a straight line. Personally he thinks the Comforts of Home building is such a nice building design with quality building materials that it should be visible from Highway 36 and the landscaping berm should not be the detraction. He would prefer to have the building owner spend the money on building materials such as higher quality triple pane windows, wall systems and insulation to mitigate sound and give a better energy benefit rather than planting landscaping to use as a berm and help with freeway sound. This would also help reduce the energy cost as well. Basically if the recommendation for the berm is being driven for sound mitigation he would prefer building materials be used instead of requiring the berm. If the berm is being driven for another reason he would prefer to see the building from Highway 36 and others should be able to visually enjoy the building features. His landscape architect told him 75 feet of vegetation depth is needed to see a measurable drop in decibel level to make a difference. He lives close to the freeway and MnDOT recently put up the concrete barriers for safety. However, the freeway noise bounces off of the barriers and out to the neighboring homes making it louder than usual. He uses this as an example that certain things do not help with sound mitigation. Mr. Frisbee said on the north side of the building, directly off of Highway 36 there are no resident rooms that will open to that area so they are not going to be affected by the noise level. Board member Shankar said the finished floor elevation is 918 feet and Highway 36 is 928 feet so even if there is a 6 to 8 foot high berm you would still be 10 feet above it and see the grade along the building and see most of the building anyways. Mr. Winges said they have resident rooms along Highway 65 at their Blain location and they haven't had a complaint about the noise. His experience has been people enjoy living close to the freeway and looking out at the traffic. This building would be set back 140 feet from the property line too. Chairperson Olson said she feels this building has been very well thought out and designed and will be an asset to the community. She really likes the fact that this is a non-combustible building and she is impressed with the proposal. Board member Schurke said he isn't against the berm, he would just like to know that the berm is providing the qualities that the city is expecting of the berm from a sound buffering standpoint. If it is being required for sound reasons he would like the city to have proof that the berm is going to do what they would like the berm to do before the owner invests that kind of money in planting the 6 to 8 foot high berm. If the berm is for aesthetics he would prefer to see the building from Highway 36 rather than looking at the trees. Chairperson Olson said she doesn't think the berm is going to help mitigate sound. Board member Shankar said the building is handsome and he thinks the berm will help with some of the sound, he is not sure how much of the sound though. The berm adds an aesthetic value to the property so he views the berm as a positive thing for both sound and aesthetic value to the property. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 11 Ms. Finwall said staff received the revised grading plan on Monday, May 8, 2006, and staff hopes the revised plans are okay with the engineering staff. Since the noise complaint at the St. Paul Pioneer Press facility located across Highway 36, staff has become more educated on noise mitigation. The PVC fence was installed to help with the noise at that location and the neighbors state the noise is worse. A berm or landscaping is a much better noise buffer compared to any type of fence. A wood fence is a better noise buffer compared to a PVC fence. Staff feels the berm and landscaping will have some effect, staff is just not sure how much of an effect it will have, but aesthetically and for noise mitigation it's a good design featu re. Board member Schurke said given the community concerns he would recommend that the owner hold an open house as soon as possible to invite the neighborhood into the facility when it is complete and have staff available to answer questions relating to how you operate the facility. Mr. Winges said the construction workers on site have pamphlets to hand out to people if requested and the workers can walk curious visitors around the site. Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date stamped March 27, 2006, for the 42- unit, two-story, assisted living facility (Comforts of Home) to be located at the southeast corner of Highway 36 and Hazelwood Street (currently 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street). Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: a. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. b. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant must submit to staff for approval the following items: 1) Revised grading and drainage plan which meets all requirements as spelled out in the April 25, 2006, engineer review, including the installation of a 6 to 8 foot high berm on the north and northwest side of the lot and the submittal of an escrow to cover the construction of a 6-foot wide sidewalk along the entire frontage of Hazelwood Street. 2) Revised landscape plan showing the following: a) The Colorado blue spruce should be changed to black hills spruce. b) The landscape plan should reflect the required 6 to 8 foot high berm. The berm should be planted with the black hills spruce on the sides and top. The trees should be planted 15 feet on center (approximately 20 to 25 trees). c) Plantings should be shown in the infiltration pond and rainwater garden. The plantings should include pre-approved native seed mixtures. d) The landscape area called out on the main floor plan in front of the entry canopies (sheet A2) should be reflected on the landscape plan. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 12 e) A planting bed should be included in the interior of the loop driveway (in between the driveway and the road). f) Two additional sugar maple trees should be planted along Hazelwood Street. g) All landscaping (excluding landscaping within the infiltration basin and rainwater garden) must be irrigated. The landscape plan must reflect the location of all required underground irrigation sprinkler heads. h) All disturbed areas must be re-established with turf. i) The applicant must take all means necessary to protect the large trees on the property during construction of the facility. 3) Revised lighting and photometrics plan which shows that the height of the freestanding lights do not exceed 25 feet (measured from ground grade to the top of the lumen). 4) Watershed district approval. 5) Building material samples. 6) The owner shall combine the two properties into one lot for tax identification purposes before the city issues a building permit. 7) 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. c. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: 1) Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. 2) Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways. 3) Install all required landscaping and an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. 4) Install all required outdoor lighting. 5) Install wetland buffer signs which indicate that no mowing, cutting, or building is permitted within the 25-foot buffer. d. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: 1) The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 13 2) 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 of the following year 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. e. Signs are not approved with this design review approval. All signs must be approved by the community design review board before installation. f. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Chairperson Olson seconded. Ayes - Olson, Shankar, Schurke The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on May 22, 2006 VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS a. Board member Shankar was scheduled to be the CDRB representative at the May 8, 2006, City Council meeting. Staff notified Board member Shankar he did not need to be present because there were no CDRB items to discuss. Ms. Finwall said the city council discussed an amendment to the Noise Ordinance to make it clearer, had the first reading of the accessory structure ordinance, and the vacation of an easement. The city council also scheduled a special meeting for June 5, 2006, to make a final decision on the Gladstone Redevelopment Plan. Chairperson Olson asked if staff could get the CDRB a copy of the Noise Ordinance. b. Board member Schurke recommended that city staff contact the Program Manager for the Energy Design Assistance Program for Xcel Energy to see how they could be proactive in providing applicants with information about energy conservation applications for future commercial applications. Architects don't always know these types of programs exist for owners. Board member Shankar said he would see more of an advantage to have someone like an Acoustical or Sound Engineer would come in to discuss noise mitigation with landscaping, berms, and fencing. Energy Design Assistance is valuable to some clients but he does not see with the types of applications the CDRB has been reviewing that a presentation from Xcel Energy would be applicable or beneficial. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-09-2006 14 Chairperson Olson said some large applications like 3M have their own energy auditor but that discussion or presentation by Xcel Energy may be applicable for some applicants. (An example would be the Second Harvest proposal and their refrigeration system the CDRB recently discussed.) She agrees with Board member Shankar regarding having a noise mitigation discussion or speaker. Board member Schurke recommended that the CDRB members compile a list of topic or discussion areas they would like to have presenters come in and speak to help the board understand future application needs. He would like to hear about storm water mitigation measures, noise mitigation, light pollution, design flexibility, designing a building and the site for safety, and energy conservation issues. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Board member Shankar will be the CDRB representative at the May 22, 2006, city council meeting. Items to discuss include the Comforts of Home at 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street and the Sign Code interpretation and Electronic Reader Boards. b. Draft Sign Code Update Ms. Finwall said she gave a presentation on the Draft Sign Code update to the city council. It did not appear the city council had many changes to the draft sign code. She said she discussed code enforcement with the city council which the city council showed a lot of interest on. More information will follow. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Ramsey County Library at Legacy Village-Sign Proposal Southlawn Drive and LegacY Parkway June 1, 2006 INTRODUCTION Project Description Jay Biedny, project manager for this proposal with Ramsey County, is requesting approval of the signage plans for the proposed Ramsey County Library in Legacy Village. The planned unit development (PUD) approval for Legacy Village required that the applicant submit a comprehensive sign plan. The library-sign proposal consists of the following: . Ground-mounted sign at main entry on Southlawn Drive (7' g" by 5' 3") . Small entry sign at Legacy Parkway (2' g" by 5' 3") . "Library Drop-off' & "Cafe Drive-thru" in main parking lot (2' by 2') . Library Deliveries at Birch Run Station access (2' by l' 8") . "Library" and "Cafe" wall signs of aluminum letters (2' 6" letter heights) . Menu and hour signs printed on doors Refer to the attachments. DISCUSSION The signs proposed are all tastefully done and meet city sign code requirements. This proposal also complies with the city's proposed sign ordinance amendment. Staff recommends approval of this signage proposal. RECOMMENDATION Approve the comprehensive sign plan for the Ramsey County Library date-stamped May 15, 2006. p:sec3\Legacy Village RamCo Library Signs 6'06 Allachments 1. Location Map 2. Plan Booklet date-stamped May 15, 2006 (separate attachment) " .s 1 ~ 8 oS r- '!]~ f- ~ i;~ .; 0- 1-] ~ '- ~ 8~ i r- 'E R] I ! a'fl!'l II- ~~~ l~rli \ "u_ I ",..0 oS '~Eg I--- ! E'. ~ I--- i ~~8 I--- . . ~.ll -! ~~~ ! ~ ~~ ".Jj;:!i = ~{f I j~] I' · .E .ue ~ 8~ I.~ ~ ~ ]0"" z UJL~n 0 ~~t i=<( ii-"i!U ~~~ 0 u""~ h~ 0 eaN ,,~.. ..J OJ ." =o.t:-~ -;h ~ . e -S.!;-O ~ ~ I ~~:l ..5 ~ i'J];:; ..0:1.-:: &l~~ ~~~ d ~ l!l 6 " p 8 u j I J~! jl tlUIHhU ,', '\'\'\'. 0 , ~ / / 1\ -<'"- I I Cl o o ~ W ..J..J c....J ~~ . I J '~~-:z ..11 , o - I---! - ! .... .--' \- -\ \ , " f-- -@~I'D_;Y I. .~ i:t:J _ J~. 3,JoNMV1H.LnOS~ ~~ ~"-r __ -~ z - ' L-c.. ::i ....- -- ~ ""6. 0:: Z " :ce z. u<( ~, 0:: -" -I- ~-~~ COU) -~/~ . . -----~~ 7 . f- 7'.,1 U H-A. C) -"-~ --< I - I-- - - ] , --1-- D r rlL ,.f- e e II:: El3EI383 ~ .- z Ell3l:E5 ElfllHu Illlffi ElEHI - I- I-- I-- I iC l~ r~rJ /iHIIB EIllIlJ , -I , -'B : CJ CJ CJ CJ []CJ I IS [JillJ]DDO:S ......... om:! i 8 ODODDOO :s _~~----~ITII I ..- . 1 I t ~ j~ 2 Attachment 1 ~ :( ~ ~ .~ ] s ,;; '" u '" ;:J o '" - MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Maple Leaf Ridge Business Center-Comprehensive Sign Plan 2475, 2485 and 2495 Maplewood Drive June 7, 2006 INTRODUCTION Request Jim Kellison, of Commercial Equity Partners, is requesting approval of the comprehensive sign plan for the Maple Leaf Ridge Business Center on Maplewood Drive. The business center is on the west side of Maplewood Drive (Highway 61), between Acorn Mini Storage and the Hmong American Alliance Church. This project consists of three office/warehouse buildings which are under construction. Refer to the applicant's narrative and plans. Background November 22, 2005: The community design review board reviewed the plans and required that the applicant submit a complete signage proposal. November 28, 2005: The city council accepted the board's motion on the design and approved a conditional use permit for this center. Code Requirement The code requires a comprehensive sign plan when there are five or more occupants or tenants in a building or development. DISCUSSION Proposed Signs Monument Sian: The applicant is proposing an 11' by 11' ground sign, (121 square feet) on a 2' 8" base which would match the building materials. This sign would have identification signage for occupants of Buildings #2 and #3, the two rear buildings. The occupants of the front building, Building #1, would not have signage on the monument sign since they face the highway. The proposed monument sign would be placed near the northerly driveway and would be set back 10 feet from the front property line. Wall SiQns: Wall signs are proposed above the front windows of each occupant space. The two-story elevations would have sign age above those upper-story windows as well. Refer to the plans. The applicant is proposing that wall signs be confined to the areas defined by the outer edges of the occupant's windows. Wall signs could be up to 30 inches tall. There are no signs proposed on the entrance towers of the building. The applicant is proposing to give building occupants a choice of three types or styles of signage. These are: . Routed aluminum panels with individual letters pushed through the cut-outs in the sign panel. These letters would be yellow and would be lit at night. . Individual channel letters mounted directly to the building face. . Individual channel letters mounted to a raceway that is fastened to the building. The raceway would be painted to match the building. Comprehensive Signage Plans The purpose of a comprehensive sign plan is to create a set of sign criteria for incoming building occupants to follow. This criteria needs to strive for uniformity in order to avoid a "hodgepodge" of sign age styles and sign sizes. This hodgepodge is evident across the highway at the auto dealerships that are not govemed by such established criteria. However, staff does recognize that the Maple Leaf Business Center would not have such randomly-placed signs. Staff's concern is that three styles of signage are being proposed. Staff's preference is for the channel-Ietters-on-raceway option. This is very similar to the channel-Ietters-directly-on-the- building option, but the use of raceways do less damage to the building by requiring fewer holes to be drilled into the exterior wall. In staff's estimation, sign plans for buildings like this should not mix the styles of signs like the metal-panel "Gladstone's" sign shown in the drawings with individually-mounted channel letters. Staff does prefer an opportunity for each occupant to utilize their business colors and script style, rather than have strict uniformity in colors and lettering style. These variations are less uniform, but there is importance in identity for businesses. The most important aspects for creating uniformity with wall signs should be to establish continuity in the allowed sign height, a sign's side-to-side range <in this case being limited to the outer edges of the windows) and in the type and style of sign to be installed. Staff suggests accepting the option for individual channel letters, but prefers those on raceways to minimize building damage. Additional Signage Elements The proposed sign criteria address the ground sign and the main wall signs. Staff, further, would like to address signs that are typically installed such as service-door signs. Refer to the recommendation below, where staff has made specific recommendations. 2 RECOMMENDATION Approve the sign criteria for the Maple Leaf Ridge Business Center date-stamped May 26, 2006, with the following revisions and conditions: 1. The monument sign is approved as proposed. 2. The allowed wall sign age for building occupants shall be restricted to individual channel letters. These letters must be mounted on a raceway to minimize building damage. Raceways must be painted to match the building. The color and style of lettering is not regulated. 3. Wall-mounted signs may only be placed above the occupant's windows on the east and west sides of the building. Such signs are not allowed on the north or south sides of the building. Sign height shall be restricted to a total height of 30 inches in the sign band above the occupant's front windows and shall not extend beyond either side of the occupant's front windows. 4. There shall not be any illuminated signs on the west side of the west building. 5. Signs are allowed on service and garage doors. These shall be non-lit, individual-letter signs (painted, adhesive-back or the like). The lettering height, style and color must be uniform throughout the business center. Letter heights must not exceed four inches. Lettering of this nature may be placed on the end elevations on service and garage doors as an exception to that listed above. 6. Signs shall not be allowed on the entrance towers of the building unless the applicant chooses to place building addresses there. 7. The applicant shall submit a landscaping plan providing for landscaping at the base of the proposed monument sign since the new sign ordinance draft requires landscaping at the base of ground signs. p:sec9\Maple Leaf Ridge Signs 6 06 Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Narrative-Maple Leaf Ridge Business Center Sign age Criteria date-stamped May 26, 2006 3. Plans date-stamped May 26, 2006 (separate attachment) 3 COUNTY ROAD C J- I.- ~\ .... TT -C I.- 0 V O~_ K 0 him ~"-- Par~ '--I f-- "--- r ,-r- --- '-- \ I-~ ~ ~ l." Q ~- J \ - >-- ~ '-- ~ UK J( \ \ ....... >-- ltElLECREST DR :d~ r~\ - ~ -- oEl\. ~fl I.- - 0 ~ )... 1 -I I / ~D MONT ~ II: - Q - sne Q >-- ~ 0 QY Q '-- "- '-- I~ L- \ L- - .... - rl __ SEXTANT ~' "" d / / C~ ,.:J ~ V / , '\ "" trellEl\ ,of: ment GERVAIS AVE Location Map Maple Leaf Ridge Business Center 4f 4 - - Attachment 2 MAPLE LEAF RIDGE BUSINESS CENTER SIGNAGE CRITERIA Signage for the Maple Leaf Ridge Business Center will be regulated by the association and by the City of Maplewood signage ordinance. All users must submit their signage design and proposal to the association and to the City of Maplewood for final review and approval. No signage shall be installed until both approvals have been obtained. Seller shall provide a monument sign as shown on the attached detail which will be constructed and installed at no cost to the Buyers by the Seller. The 12 individual name panels on the monument sign will be for Buyers of units in Buildings #2 and #3. Building #1, with its Highway 61 street frontage, will not have an opportunity for signage on this monument sign. If a Buyer in Building #2 or Building #3 buys two units, they will be allowed two signage locations. The lettering on a sign panel for an individual user will be at the Buyers expense. The monument sign will be internally illuminated and will be turned on by photocell and off by the time clock. Signage on the building will be constricted to those areas that are shown with the diagonal lines on the attached drawing. No other locations will be allowed. User is to provide a signage design and proposal for the association and the City of Maplewood to review and approve. No signs will be installed until approval has been obtained from both the association and from the City of Maplewood. Special note should be taken that the signage should be designed in such a way to . minimize the number of penetrations into the concrete block finish. This will prevent potential leakage and will also retain the aesthetic beauty of the building if signage is removed and new signage installed. Users need to inform Seller if they will be using illuminated signage so that a signage circuit can be brought to the location of the signage from the Buyer's electric panel at the time of construction of the users improvements. Seller shall provide and install at no expense to Buyer the numeral identifications required by the City on the buildings and on the rear overhead doors and man doors. RECEIVED MAY 262006 5 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Comforts of Home Comprehensive Sign Plan Brian Winges of Comforts of Home 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street June 7, 2006 for the June 13, 2006 CDRB Meeting INTRODUCTION Brian Winges of Comforts of Home is proposing signage for the new Comforts of Home assisted living facility to be developed on the southeast corner of Highway 36 and Hazelwood Street (2300/2310 Hazelwood Street). A requirement of the conditional use permit for Comforts of Home is that all signs be approved by the community design review board (CDRB) prior to issuance of a sign permit. DISCUSSION Background The property is zoned business commercial (BC). Within this zoning district, multiple dwelling residential uses, such as the Comforts of Home assisted living facility, are allowed with a conditional use permit (CUP). The project is also being approved as a planned unit development (PUD) in order to allow flexibility from the city's codes and to produce a superior development. The city council will hold the final hearing for the Comforts of Home's development on June 12, 2006. One recommended condition of approval of the PUD by city staff and the planning commission was that all signage for the development be approved by the CDRB. This will allow the CDRB to review the signs for architectural compatibility to the building and surrounding properties. Sign Code Requirements The CDRB should reference the board's recently adopted draft sign code when reviewing this proposal. Since the property will remain zoned as business commercial, the draft sign code would allow one wall sign and one freestanding sign per street frontage. Since Comforts of Home has three street frontages (Highway 36, Hazelwood Street, and Cope Avenue) the applicant would be allowed three wall signs and three freestanding signs. The freestanding signs must maintain at least at 100 foot setback from one another and a 10 foot setback from all property lines. The size of the wall signs is based on the size of the building. Comforts of Home will be 13,795 square feet in area and would be allowed 100 square foot walls sign. The size of the freestanding sign is based on the street classification which the property has frontage. Comforts of Home has street frontage on one principal arterial and two collectors and would be allowed freestanding signs up to 180 square feet in area and 25 feet in height. Proposed Signage Comforts of Home is proposing one wall sign and two freestanding (monument) signs. Staff finds these signs to be in scale and architecturally compatible to the building and the surrounding properties. 1. The wall sign will be located on the north side of the building, toward Highway 36 and will be 22.5 square feet in area. The wall sign will consist of individual letters which are 18 inches in height. 2. One monument sign will be located on the northwest corner of the property, adjacent Highway 36, and the other will be located along Hazelwood Street. The Highway 36 monument sign is proposed at 37 square feet in area and 8 feet in height. The Hazelwood Street monument sign is proposed at 8 square feet in area and 5 feet, 9 inches in height. The signs will maintain the required 100-foot setback from each other. However, according to the site plan it do not appear that the signs will maintain the required 10-foot setback from all property lines and the 25-foot visibility triangle requirements for the Highway 36 sign, which will be placed at an intersection. A condition of approval should include the submittal of a revised site plan verifying that the placement of the signs meet these requirements. The monument signs will be constructed of cultured stone to match the building and will include an internally illuminated sign panel. A condition of approval should include that the illumination from the Hazelwood Street monument sign be turned off at 10 p.m. nightly and that a landscape plan be submitted which shows landscaping around the base of the signs to include low-maintenance shrubs and perennials. RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans date-stamped June 6, 2006, for a comprehensive sign plan for Comforts of Home assisted living facility located at 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a sign permit for this project. 2. Sign criteria for the site include the following: a. Wall sign: One wall sign located on the north side of the building. The wall sign is limited to individual letters which are 18 inches in height. b. Freestanding signs: Two monument signs to be located on the northwest corner of the property (along Highway 36) and on the east side of the property (along Hazelwood Street). The monument signs are limited to 37 square feet in area and 8 feet in height for the Highway 36 sign and 8 square feet in area and 5 feet, 9 inches in height for the Hazelwood Street sign. The monument signs must maintain a 100-foot setback from one another, a 10- foot setback to all property lines, and must meet the required 25-foot visibility triangle per city code for any sign placed at an intersection. The signs must be constructed of cultured stone or other material which is compatible to the building 2 with internally illuminated sign panels. The illumination from the Hazelwood Street monument sign must be turned off at 10 p.m. nightly. 3. Prior to issuance of a sign permit, the applicant must submit the following to be approved by city staff: a. Revised site plan showing the location of the freestanding sign which maintains a 10-foot setback to all property lines and does not impede on the required 25-foot visibility triangle. b. Landscape plan showing landscaping around the base of the freestanding sign to . include low-maintenance shrubs and perennials. 4. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. p:com-dev\sec10\Comforts of Home\Comprehensive Sign Plan Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Freestanding Sign Elevations 4. Wall Sign Elevations 3 Attachment 1 u-J~C -'=II'IIC:Ic:J::'F~~*II~[]DCJlqD~ ~~I,II'.g'1I!V~" if,," '-:J I ',e,-,J I ;~!qr~21Ir~=-;~ ,:::~I:~~ .;~~ 1 D~ll!'IHI~!'~(J~~~~'d;g,g [Ull [(["VCidr~ ,",~,'"tty6~lflJ LI~ ~"_ D'~~'I,1, ~""',"~,,'", 0-+,' '9C::I",""',",lk~' B I 3 .~ _' " ~_II',~oIODCb'Q ooPoI\l"'rll~OJc;lDifj~~ll, ,LJ Ilil['~~"r~)( _ _ _n ~_~_ (1, I CJ C\ D 'gJflI GOD "0 lillJol~E ___~L I "-If'OL':.'l'_l_L .. ,! - --\~CjP;.;]T~~'-ci'cDo-';;;~'! tCbtrPPI"'I~--lln 0 ,-' ql ~n aCi I) <~J~" 11'~:YO*",oo~t'l~'d'P~_D'"-~'1 c=J tJ IL ~~ll', \,ILr, '- ' jllllcIOLci'DDCOOrCf'ffi'IIJI=;'Q~h~,hl I ,--'~~~ I ~I ,---- 1 III _ ~- ,,-/ - U~:--. ;J::,~~ 1-'1' J:::'C0ll., ,_I ~ I ! U 2300/2310 Hazelwood Streetf~~ D co -: 1 f"DbCopD_ . I' ~_~ '"" IJ ' I o LJ~ Ie ',,1" ! <=\,1:1 IL- ~- o oOo;='D I!!~,'~__o D 0, -o~1 C"'~cDIq,bD~_- ,= D il I _ nci:' D ,~bljCJpc4:: odqoCjo9c?~_ ,~ojc":DIO ~11~~JoQ'~~;1 ~ f-D Ice-=- -- ~ - _' --, le:11 IT~~~ri:'.:~ : --- '1''--_ - - ~:I!~I~~~o~D~~:,III~~I;.~:~l li_c:~::w_~~~rnlc_,~~~cD~cq=l~1 cP I _ I ~~ OlCJJ ~oc:j~~v "-, [] ~~,O~,",-~b~,'~J~c~'I',',~~ci'J~10~r~ =-1.---'-_1__ _ -~ ~;II,~9~IC~~"IQo~]II'~~~l:Y _ ~_ j - r;:J 1:~_D!?~~D~D~~EBLr::fl=-==9__o j ~ 0) L:2RCJEJII~~:J}d~gJ _CJ CJI~ = 1~ II~ I D l'I5!E, ~,TI"oo:,:lOoF~I',',~,:a~~~~,Fc c o~,~.'.[2,>~W,~llc-,=.:',',_u.'.~_, "j, ~I,I ~ ~ ,0 [] " II ~, I l;i~~Joj019CJ>'.CJD:::J D~ ~~ .djCJ~i~_J =PP_S! L', I J I Ie le~;.'b,i~,I"'~~QII!~D-, dO -Itl I -~"II ".D'~b9o~~g~,",.'....'....~~~.DJf6;o;I~-'1 [J ,IL, l'c!>nPi1l,t'lno.r'ljl ,1,-, =_ _ :r: ' I ,j~~OMOO~' 60 ." ," if. p' ole J' pc' .-Ir> ~ N w ~J~ ~~~ E Location Map s " : 0 SrGN '!!I' I- u.1 1U ~ I- U) 0 0 0 5; --I 1U N <{ I o N w ,,~~ ="'- ~~ E s Attachment 2 - - ,/ ~___u___._u u____u~/ I-U~~* __ _ ~-e--~-,~J OC,,"'-_'~T~~~__________---:~_, __ ISlG~'A,:1 "I W // I~ / I /--', . ./ /'f 'I / /,1 I : / /1 I '" ~,/ // I 16 ~ / / I ,~ / / / - j ~ / / 1 --,--' ~/ / / ( / / \ \ / ) \ / I ~I I I ;1 1 / I 1 /1 I --~7q----u-l 1/1 1/1 1/ I r I I I IZ I /1 I 1/ I 1 '/ / 1/ / 1iS'~ <'''{OJ. / J '" I .~~ 1" / // / -;/ / // / / / / / / / 'I '/ \ I I I /-\ '- I I I / --___ L' : / \\ ----- I I / : ~ / ------- ,_..J._________---==-__ _ , I, I I ", . I ---~ ---- ----- -------- c.: Site Plan Attachment 3 2',0" 6'-411 PRECAST CONe. CAP :t ~"-::- ....-' N\\ ~tii:~ff _".J" ~l'~\\ Comforts - OF-H6m~ SENIOR LIVING ~ ~ 9 .. ,- 6"4"~ 5'.9" IN ERNAL.L.'T' LIT CAeIN~T IGN CULTURED STONE VENEER --!t-,.....'"':_.:.....-.."....'~~'"'",....";!:.7.,.-.t..,'-'--..:>j--+' ~ GRADE J 8'-8" J . "-0' . e e MONUMENT SIGN 'AI ;c. '-~l'c+iL ---.---.~~ ...,-. ".'''.. 'C6thfO OFH5me SENIOR LIVING PReCAST CONe. CAP 5'...."x~'.9" CAST CONe SIGN PANEL ~ ~ CULTUR~D STONE VENEER - --=. ..,.~ ......., ..".,"-"...-.;.,....~^ ".~",.. - ~~.. -- ~ GRAOe J 8'-011 J 8'-4" e . .t' MONUMENT SIGN 'B' Freestanding Sign Elevations CONTtNUOUS RIDG~ V~NT, TYP. e~ 'TlM&eRL.INe S~L.eCT 40' ASPHAL. T SHINGL.fS, TYP. D~CORATM WAL.L. &RACK~T TYP. HAIliDmlM PlANK I"'ASCIA, TYP. HAADIIHINGL.e - "5TAGGelt:~D ~DG~ NOTCH~D PAN~L. Ie- ~XPOSUR~1 TYP. CLAD WOOD wINDOWS, TYP. .PORTICO"- COMPOSITe RAIL.ING S'T'ST~M, TYP. HAROIPAN~L. eo. '" &ATTeN V~RTICAL. SIDING, TYP. ~/4x12 HARDITRIM PLANK, TYP. PR~CAST CONCR~Te SILL CAP PR~-I"'IN. M~TAL I"'~NC~ .. GAT~ CUL T1JReO STON~ V~N~~R Attachment 4 ~ -'-,- .r_~' '':;~;::~~' ~: c ,~ ..~-" ...:t::: .-' ". "::E- " .'=t== ~ ~--':--:-::':~,::- --'--:..f.=2-- --p . I c========== I I =======C===========C= I I I I I ------+-+-'----:'J I ------{"=J-.L--{=J O~CORATIV~ WALl.. &RACK~T ffi ~~~~ , 2..... HIGH L.fTTeR EXTERIOR ELEVATION v... 11-0" Wall Sign Elevation