Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/13/2007 AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, February 13, 2007 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: January 9, 2007 5. Unfinished Business: None Scheduled 6. Design Review: a. Nonconforming Four-Plex and Tri-Plex Landscape/Screening/Parking Plan - 1349 and 1359 County Road C b. Sign Code Interpretation - Electronic Reader Board Signs 7. Visitor Presentations: 8. Board Presentations: 9. Staff Presentations: a. Community Design Review Board Appointments b. Annual Report c. Election of Chair and Vice Chair d. Community Pride Awards e. Clear Channel Billboard Update f. Sign Code Update 10. Adjourn DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JANUARY 9,2007 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina Chairperson Linda Olson Board member Joel Schurke Board member Ananth Shankar Present at 6:04 p.m. Present Present Absent Staff Present: Chuck Ahl, Public Works Director Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Ledvina requested discussion regarding outdoor signs during board presentations. Board member Ledvina moved to approve the agenda as amended. Chairperson Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Olson, Schurke The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for January 9,2007. Board member Schurke moved approval of the minutes of January 9,2007. Board member Ledvina seconded. Ayes --- Ledvina, Olson, Schurke The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Carmax Auto Superstore - Northeast Corner of Highway 61 and Beam Avenues Mr. Ekstrand said on December 12, 2006, the CDRB reviewed the Carmax plans. They felt that the building design should be enhanced to provide windows on the service garage. At this meeting, the applicant presented building elevations which also showed the car wash building. Then on December 18, 2006, the city council approved the Carmax plans, but required that the applicant resubmit the architectural plans to the CDRB for further review due to the board's recommendation for additional windows. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-9-2007 2 The council required that the applicant provide a three-dimensional cad drawing of the elevations for submission to the design review board for their approval based upon previous suggestions by the board and staff. Mr. Ekstrand said he handed revised plans with a three dimensional view of the proposed building on the site to each of the board members prior to the start of the meeting this evening. Staff looked at some of the existing auto dealerships along Highway 61 to see which have windows on their service garages. Staff found that Maplewood Toyota was the only dealership with windows on their service garage. The Kline Motor Sports building and Maplewood Volvo had none. Lexus, Nissan and Audi dealerships did not have service-garage windows, but had windows on their second-floor offices above their service garage. Since the CDRB reviewed the Carmax plans, the applicant has revised them to provide a continuation of the EIFS fascia material around all sides of the service garage for continuity. They also added windows on the east wall of the service garage. Staff feels that these proposed enhancements are acceptable revisions. The revised building design is attractive and up to par or exceeds the design of other auto dealerships on Highway 61. Board member Ledvina asked where the recommendation came from for the three dimensional plans came from? Mr. Ekstrand said that was a recommendation from Councilmember Rossbach. He thought a three dimensional view of the building and the site would help the CDRB visually understand how the building would appear from all angles. Board member Ledvina thanked staff for the explanation. Chairperson Olson asked if the windows that were added to the service garage were functioning windows and if they would allow light to pass through or would it be a glass panel? Board member Schurke said the plans look like viewable glass. If you look at the other view of the glass it shows etching. Mr. Ekstrand said 3M has a vision glass that you can see through and there is another type of glass that allows light to pass through it. Staff would probably have to clarify that question with the applicant. Board member Ledvina said just to clarify, the windows you are referring to are not on the service garage; that is actually the office/showroom area. Mr. Ekstrand clarified where the service portion of the building was on the plan. The windows that the board requested the applicant add were on one side of the building and that may be the presentation area. Chairperson Olson asked if the applicant was here to answer questions. Mr. Ekstrand said the applicant for Carmax is not present this evening. Mr. Bruce Mogren is in the audience as the adjoining property owner. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-9-2007 3 Chairperson Olson asked if Mr. Mogren wanted to address the board and add anything to the discussion. Mr. Bruce Mogren, Mogren Development Company, 1801 Gervais Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the board. He said he's here because they did the entire plat and he is the property owner adjacent to this proposal and he is interested in knowing what the final plan is for the site and would like to make sure the site looks nice. Personally he thinks the proposal looks nice compared to what Carmax Corporation had originally proposed and the building plan has come a long way. He knows Carmax has built a lot of these buildings across the country. He thanked the CDRB for their work on this proposal. Board member Ledvina moved to approve the revised 3-D perspective building-design plans date-stamped December 27,2006, and elevations received prior to the start of tonight's CDRB meeting January 9,2007, for the proposed Carmax Automobile Dealership. Approval is subject to compliance with the conditions of approval as required by the city council on December 18, 2006. Chairperson Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Olson Nay - Schurke The motion passed. Board member Schurke said he thought board member Shankar who represented the CDRB at the city council meeting did an outstanding job articulating the points that were raised during the board's review of the Carmax proposal. He would recommend, but not require that architect's submit cad drawings with a three dimensional view for projects over a certain dollar amount such as a project over 1 million dollars. That would help the board see what a project would look like from all sides. It wasn't that the CDRB didn't understand the proposal the three dimensional drawing was to give a visual example of what the finished product would look like and how the proposal would affect the surrounding proposal area. The street elevation is also important when understanding how a proposal would look. Board member Schurke said at the previous CDRB meeting board member Ledvina commented that there are certain things that are not in the purview of the CDRB and are not part of the board's role. However, he believes the CDRB has an expectation to look at aesthetic implications of a site. He is voting against this project based on the rational that this proposal is being built in the shoreland area. He thinks the natural amenities are part of the aesthetic. As the board explores their role he thinks certain things needs to be considered as part of what the board is responsible for making recommendations on to the city council. It's not only the building itself that would be built on the site; it's also about landscaping and other things. When you get into wetlands and shoreland issues he thinks from a PUD planning standpoint the CDRB should look at making sure the plantings are done proportionally to the development in the PUD. That way we don't end up in a situation where developers squish trees in a given spot just because it's the only available planting area, it needs to be planned for functional reasons too. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-9-2007 4 Board member Schurke said he thinks board member Shankar came very close to designing the building for Carmax which he doesn't think that is the role of the CDRB. The architect should respond to the recommendations of the board and then the city council can review that and either make a decision on it or allow city staff to work with the architect or developer to come to a final decision. In the Carmax proposal he believes city staff could have made the final approval on the changes. He wanted his comments to go on record that the CDRB trusts the decision of city staff and thought this was not necessary to come back before the CDRB this evening. It's important that we don't elongate the development process to the point where it delays the process and could keep people from bringing good projects into the community. Board member Ledvina echoed those comments. These drawings meet his expectation regarding what he felt the board was looking for in the redesign of the building and he felt it would have been fine for staff to work with the applicant regarding the conditions the board placed on the recommendation they made to the city council and this shouldn't have been necessary to come back before the CDRB. Chairperson Olson said she agreed with those comments. The council could have made the final decision based on city staff working with the developer and it wasn't necessary for this plan to come back before the CDRB. She said she appreciated seeing the three dimensional cad drawings. In fact she would like staff to ask the applicant if their architect could include three dimensional cad plans with their applications. Mr. Ekstrand said the city could make a recommendation but not make it a "requirement" because some firms cannot provide that information. Staff will amend the application form stating that recommendation. Chairperson Olson said she also liked board member Schurke's recommendation to enhance the scope of what the CDRB would like to see and she had made that request in years past. Many times the board is presented with a plan that shows the proposal up to the property line and no information of the surrounding property area. For example, with the Legacy Village plan the board saw the plan for the entire property area which was nice to know what was planned for the areas surrounding each development. VI. DESIGN REVIEW None. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS a. Outdoor billboard signs Board member Ledvina requested the board discuss outdoor billboard signs. Board member Ledvina said large electronic outdoor billboards look like large television screens to him. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-9-2007 5 Board member Ledvina said he recently saw a billboard in south Maplewood off of Highway 494 near Carver General Repair, south of Lake Road. He said this "was" a regular outdoor billboard and it was converted to an electronic billboard sign that has flashing movements that change every 5 seconds and the sign can be seen 2 miles away. Chairperson Olson said she saw an electronic billboard sign that had been converted from a regular billboard located off of Highway 35W going into Minneapolis and the sign flashes and changes images every few minutes. Mr. Ekstrand said the city received a phone call from a Cottage Grove planner who asked about the electronic billboard sign in south Maplewood. Because Shann Finwall handles the sign code Mr. Ekstrand said he transferred the call to her but didn't have any further information on the situation. The billboard company converted the sign from a standard billboard sign to this electronic television billboard without checking with the city to see what the sign ordinance was or ask if a permit was needed. Staff will ask Shann to report on this at the next CDRB meeting. Chairperson Olson said she would appreciate that. She believes we haven't seen the last of these types of signs and that this is a new trend that could be an issue with the sign ordinance. Mr. Ekstrand said the topic of electronic billboards is just another subject matter that needs to be addressed. Board member Ledvina said electronic signs have been addressed when the board revised the sign ordinance and it has already been discussed at length. It's disheartening to see something like this electronic billboard sign without having any interaction between the owner of the billboard and the City of Maplewood. Chairperson Olson thanked board member Ledvina for bringing the subject matter to everyone's attention. Board member Schurke asked staff what the recourse is for a billboard company converting a regular billboard sign to an electronic television billboard? Is there a requirement that the billboard company did not meet for review or submittal to change the sign over? Mr. Ekstrand said the billboard company made the sign conversion without the city knowing about it and if it weren't for the telephone call to city staff, we may have not known about it. Sometimes things are done and it's up to the city to catch it or for a resident or someone else to make a phone call to the City of Maplewood. Chairperson Olson asked if a billboard company doesn't pull a permit aren't there repercussions that could take place? Mr. Ekstrand said if the electronic outdoor billboard sign is in compliance with the city's sign ordinance but they didn't get a permit, the city could double fee the company for the sign permit. If they made a change to the billboard sign that doesn't comply with the city's sign ordinance the city can tell them they have to convert the sign back to the way it was or they could apply for a sign variance and it would come before the city for review. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-9-2007 6 Chairperson Olson said she didn't think this electronic billboard sign would be incompliance with the city's sign ordinance. Board member Ledvina said in terms of the proposed sign ordinance, the electronic billboard sign wouldn't be in compliance. However, the sign ordinance the CDRB worked on has not been approved or adopted by the city council yet and is not in affect. Mr. Ekstrand said the new sign ordinance has not been adopted by the city council yet. Shann has not been able to get the sign ordinance reviewed by the city council yet. Due to other priorities in the city, Shann has been instructed to put the sign ordinance on the back burner so to speak. She is anxious to conclude the sign ordinance process but with the other numerous things going on in the city right now she has been told to put the sign ordinance on hold. Chairperson Olson asked if she should contact the city councilor the mayor regarding the proposed sign ordinance revisions to stress the importance of making this a priority? Maybe staff could bring this matter up with the city council and let them know the CDRB would like to know the status of the sign ordinance and the timing of the process. Mr. Ekstrand said staff would check on that for the board. Board member Schurke asked what the status was for board members whose terms expired on December 31, 2006, and the process of continuing to serve even though technically they have not been reappointed yet? He said he received a letter stating his term had ended and that he needed to reapply and be interviewed by the city council. Mr. Ekstrand said this situation happens at this time of the year. Members who wish to serve again may not officially get reappointed. The process is to reapply for the position on the board and be interviewed by the city council. The city council will be interviewing new applicants and current board or commission members and the city council will make the decision. The city appreciates the boards and commissions who volunteer to serve the city and appreciates them continuing to serve until the process is completed. Board member Schurke said he thinks the process to reappoint people whose terms are going to expire should really begin before the term expired on December 31,2006. Mr. Ekstrand said staff is not involved in the process this time. This is being handled by the city manager's office. A letter was sent out by the city manager's office. Staff doesn't have the exact timeline of the process but staff thanks the board members for continuing to serve on the CDRB until they hear otherwise. Since former board member John Hinzman resigned we have four current CDRB members and we need at least three board members for a quorum to hold a CDRB meeting. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:41 p.m. MEMORANDUM LOCATION: DATE: Greg Copeland, City Manager Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Nonconforming Three-Plex and Four-Plex Landscape/Screening/Parking Plan 1349/1359 County Road C February 7, 2007 for the February 13 CDRB Meeting TO: FROM: SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION Project Description Craig Anondson and Fred Richie, owners of 1349 and 1359 County Road C, are requesting review of the existing landscape/screening/parking conditions on their nonconforming properties. (Refer to the location and landscape/screening/parking plan maps attached.) Background In 1968 the City of Maplewood approved the construction of two duplexes on these properties. At that time the properties were zoned and guided in the city's comprehensive plan as double dwelling residential. Some time after the city's initial approval of the duplexes (approximately 1970), previous owners converted the duplexes to a three-plex (1349 County Road C) and a four-plex (1359 County Road C) without the required city approvals. The city discovered the illegal three-plex and four-plex in 2004 and required the owners to apply for a comprehensive land use map and zoning change from double dwelling residential to high multiple dwelling residential. This change would have allowed the properties to remain as a three-plex and a four-plex, and would also have allowed future redevelopment of the lots with a higher density. Due to concerns about the possibility of future redevelopment of the lots to higher density, the city council ultimately approved a conditional use permit for a planned unit development (PUD) to allow the properties to remain as a three-plex and a four-plex until the properties were sold, at which time the properties must be converted back to duplexes. (Refer to the July 11, 2005, city council meeting minutes attached.) A condition of the PUD required the property owners to submit a landscape/ screening/parking plan to the community design review board for approval. Review of the plan by the board is intended to ensure adequate landscaping, screening, and parking exists on the site to meet city code requirements. DISCUSSION Landscape/Screening Requirement City Code requires a landscaped and possible screened area of 20 feet in width where a multiple dwelling abuts property zoned for single or double dwellings. Screening shall be satisfied by the use of a screening fence, planting screen, berm or a combination. The three-plex at 1349 County Road C is adjacent a single family dwelling on the west (1343 County Road C) and north (1350 Kohlman Avenue). The four-plex at 1359 County Road C is adjacent a single family dwelling on the north (1358 Kohlman Avenue) and a vacant lot on the east (along County Road C). The adjacent single family dwellings on Kohlman Avenue are located approximately 400 feet from the three-plex and four-plex. These properties are separated by several mature trees and a hill which creates adequate screening. City staff does not recommend additional landscaping or screening in this area. The adjacent single family dwelling along County Road C, however, is located approximately 15 feet from the three-plex. This property owner has installed a 6-foot- high screening fence on the east side of the deck to create screening from the three- plex. Other than the screening fence on the deck, there is no other landscaping or screening in between the properties. Mr. Anondson, owner of the three-plex, states that the two property owners prefer the openness between the two properties so that one property owner can cut the grass on both front yards and one property owner can cut the grass on both back yards. City staff recommends that the community design review board discuss screening options along the west side of the parking bays located in the rear yard of the three-plex at a minimum. This would allow the rear yards to remain open as desired by both property owners, but would also ensure screening of vehicles parked in the bays from the adjacent single family dwelling. Parking Requirement City code requires multiple dwellings to have two parking stalls per unit. The four-plex has a three-car garage and enough room within the parking bays in the rear of the structure for four cars (7 parking stalls). The three-plex has a two-car garage and enough room within the parking bays in the rear of the structure for five cars (7 parking stalls). City staff finds that the multiple dwellings currently have adequate parking to meet city code requirements. Neighborhood Comment Adjacent property owners were notified of the landscape/screening/parking plan proposal and asked to comment or attend the February 13, 2007, community design review board meeting. City staff received one comment from the property owner at 1358 Kohlman Avenue. This property has no concerns with the existing landscape/screening/parking on the site. Their only concern was that the three-plex and four-plex property owners convert the properties back to duplexes upon the sale of the properties as required by the city council. The property owners have signed and recorded with the county a declaration of restrictions which requires them to convert the structures back to duplexes upon sale. 2 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the landscape/screening/parking plan for the nonconforming properties located at 1349 and 1359 County Road C with the following condition: Installation of a 6-foot-high screening fence or landscaping along the west side of the parking bays located in the rear yard of the three-plex at 1349 Co. Road C. plcom-devlsec3lfebruary 13, 2007, cdrb report Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2. Landscape/Screening/Parking Plan 3. July 11, 2005, City Council Minutes 4. Pictures 3 N w*, Attachment 1 I 'I c":j b C? 1::;] m~ I [ll ' - g----~ GJ D P- ~,' " ' I ~ c I , -~i ::::: i ,(0, ~. .8 c: ~p --I , i~ I Location Map '/, ~ II' i "I ,I-f' I' 11'1,DII ,', I,C]~; 0_1 ~ 0'1 II"', II ~J, I , ' 11'1~IIIII,o_;', :-;,c-,[Jr,_blli~11 1101, 1:~llml,cI91 I ,----, I I. -1J I r',l1" . i, I C II~J I '-,c",0' "I I"l'-I ,-I f-m__'IIIn',sn2l 11'\1-'rtv1 I :J',:f I ',~flll UrJ", I' ,II'll CP I'D' I (JI-1 I d'-81 'I "Qt-('=1 _--1__ _-.!:. :-I.}~ ._--1___-1-___1, L,-~ !.________ l_-----L el, , , '_'r--,_-,Kqpl~nAvenpel"" , r- :,';1 0' LI_',Q I C!,,' 'J II ' 25i Pili"; ~ II II ~ ~ II 'nn 111;=tejP pi I ~J 0 " 'pi ell ~ ill -"I -c C. I I '1 WC] ,;',' I '+'1 U I I -- - 'jjU' I I rl 0 , " 0 I [' ! _~ led I [] I I Li ,I j'VC'T)' , _ , 10 I 0)1 us II I J ',:J 1'1 II b ' I f]] l:r I I ,iLLI,..J U-_f li O ' O)L rt - I I C I ,'I , , I, 0)' -e' I l:;1 - I. ' I I " I "' I, , _I DI (/)1 L-I " , I 'II 'I I I I I P 21 ~1__;cJ_ -t I rD - 3, ..1+_ II -- -+ I 1 I l 1- (/) I' , , Ii 1..t:1 j 'I I I I 0' I I L~ , ,-1--- .~ ',', I I, I - I I "E -r' ' I I ,un I Ct F=jo,- I] ,I I I I I pD ; _ _ ~ ,-Ie-, 'cinl I - ,1-'1 c: q I I qJ' 'b ep 0 I I I I , 1'-'51 Wl-'c I I I I~~I 1 i::J I IWI___j 1 I[J i.-i ~! ,. I ~ 10 l-i. 1"'-['-' I nil ~n' nC-:--l,1 QUJlJq C=-I il ____,1 ![R ___L _! i,''"-J~,Sl~~~c, ,01 \tJqJC1l1 L_~I IV'I , , G9Ur1f~Roacrj;1 UI I cB1 ItL~:~~Plex ~~~~o_I~~,ur~:II:x I'~J' I I~~j I . eel] I"n -~~ ' I ' '0 _~_Di ~ I "F' I--J~-- 1 " o~ r' 'J'" i~1 81 ~ I I, ~J' [- - ,e- 0 jT:~ '. IJ:; c -cCr I "----", --- r:J Ci ---j ":_~ I 0 LJ D --------0 0 , , s :1 - ee_ I _'6 o IIJ"'C [l o C D n_ 2 1---- 1 ----I , 1 1 Attachment 2 ,.u , L_ Koblffi~=ft~e.,--~-,-_ .- ! I -I , { :;,z,(p \~50 I I \ :;5'0, IO'(P ,-.r'l , .~ r------l I I ,_J I,~ 1\ ULJ I~_>"" '~ ~ , I -~.. ~', City Code Requires the Following: Landscape/Screening: A landscaped and possible screened area of not less than 20 feet in width shall be provided where a multiple dwelling abuts a property zoned for single or double dwellings. Screening shall be satisfied by the use of a screening fence, planting screen, berm or combination thereof. Parking: Two parking stalls per unit. ! ~ _. '/!3:= 1 , I ,~~)__~ . "~ , , (\ 1 OF] , , , I I I I I ;---t@> ., 1 ~R ____:L' ,1 1 \ ~~ P.I I \:J-I9 1 124~ , " \ - I (, \ ' ) '1. , I<!y " '1'" ) (- ( (, (Y. iJ.(J.{f'I + < -rill ('~t,\ (' ( -- 'f.,~.. .'"- _/-" \.------' , ~, ~, !~ I ,_.1 ,jJ 1 1 '__.J (0\1 1'\ t'i '1\001 d.. c... ',----' 11 }I 1-- ! ] ,,<,--:," ,,' '"..";,;.,,.,.,;,J I~ T--- ! --I I ~: <::v , <;..' 1 <:rl 10 L..___ N w ~~~ L~~ E Existing Landscape! Screening/Parking Plan s Attachment 3 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota was duly called and held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 11th of July, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the followina resolution approvina the attached comprehensive land use chanae plan from double dwellina residential to hiah multiple dwellina residential for the properties located at 1349 and 1359 Countv Road C East: RESOLUTION 05-07-109 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Fred Richie and Craig Anondson applied for a change to the city's land use plan from Double Dwelling Residential (R-2) to High Multiple-Dwelling Residential (R-3H). WHEREAS, this change applies to the properties at 1349 and 1359 County Road C East. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On June 6, 2005, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements prior to their recommendation. 2. On July 11, 2005, the city council discussed the land use plan change. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the above-described change to the land use plan for the following reasons: 1. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for high-density residential use. This includes: a. Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents, regardless of age, ethnic, racial, cultural or socioeconomic background. A diversity of housing types should include apartments, town houses, manufactured homes, single-family housing, public-assisted housing and low- to moderate-income housing, and rental and owner-occupied housing. b. Disperse low- and moderate-income developments throughout the city, rather than concentrating them in one area or neighborhood. c. Have a balanced housing supply, with housing available for people at all income levels. d. Have a variety of housing types for ownership and rental for people in all stages of the life-cycle. e. Have a community of well-maintained housing and neighborhoods, including ownership and rental housing. f. Add to and preserve the affordable housing in the city. g. The properties are located on a collector street, with no additional traffic added to local streets. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the followino resolution approvino a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the properties located at 1349 13 units) and 1359 14 units) Countv Road C East. At chanoe of ownership. thev would revert to R121 Duplexes: Conditional Use Permit Resolution 05-07-110 WHEREAS, Fred Richie and Craig Anondson applied for a conditional use permit for a planned unit development to allow three dwelling units to remain on 1349 County Road C and four dwelling units to remain on 1359 County Road C. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the properties at 1349 and 1359 County Road C. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On June 6, 2005, the planning commission held a public hearing. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission prior to their recommendation. 2. On July 11, 2005, the city council discussed the conditional use permit. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interierence or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The planned unit development allows for three dwelling units to be located at 1349 County Road C and four dwelling units to be located at 1359 County Road C. Any additional dwelling units must be approved by the city council. 2. The planned unit development for three dwelling units to be located 1349 County Road C and four dwelling units to be located at 1359 County Road C will expire once the properties are sold. Once the properties are sold, either consequtively or individually, they will be converted back to double dwelling (R-2) zoning which allows for two dwelling units per property. In order to ensure this is accomplished, the property owners must file appropriate title work indicating such, and provide such notice to any potential buyer and notify the city of the sale. Appropriate title work to be approved by city staff prior to recording. 3. Any exterior modifications including additions and accessory structures which require building permits must be reviewed by the Community Design Review Board. 4 The property owners must submit and maintain a landscape/screening/parking plan to the Community Design Review Board for approval. The plan must ensure adequate landscaping/screening and parking is existing or installed. 5 The property owners must have each individual unit inspected by the city's building official and fire marshal to ensure life/safety issues are addressed. 6 The city council shall review this permit in one year. Seconded by Council member Rossbach Ayes-All Attachment 4 D€G.2ot>\o - --..-:-- -- --- .. '.31!!<~ "- .-...c. ,- ~ -,; 17_ ~ ..... ~. - -:-4 .... E:f't.::, .,.- . ll'. :. / . \'./- ......... . ',--'- _ ,_ -'\-- -'0.--'. .," .' \~' ~ -' , . - - - - ~-'. \?6ct Q..o ~{) ~. c.... ~ \J\1-Gflrq""'L-O\ \l:J \~'""C\ Cf) \?.O e. 4- \31.\') to {<,O c... TtJ WE:.:,T De..c...ZoDIo , "'! , ;~1~r~f~~~(~~i~~*~:~~r~ , ~ t '",""""" ......... "'\' '.. . , ".' .. -..-.- , """" ""'"'~'" .... ..."".~" ~~ '. "'., '~",;,:,:,-..-",,,,,~,,-';:;':'::~~':-"":~,~,':.;':V;"::':;~~',~~~~;t~ ~ '~.r,"'''' tJ'\ .,.,...'1';.. , . -. ./~~.....'ll. :.. ..~.......~lo..,......_ ",. .. ..'.... .. ., ':':', .... v '" <t~~~.-:.. :. ~;.~;;,~}.:~ .. ;C,-;.;~,'t-~.. .. ',,' -,., ~.. ,i;;o.' .. .. .~. :,.;." '. .- ,r. .... DeL. 2.006 Dtt. ZDolo ~R 'MR. 0 6P \35q c.c ~ () c... Oi' 5 I \-.l\::7l.O 810) Ie: tto'i\'\E:6 TO N O~\l\ -- . . ~. ..~.:... ' "'"' - ~-':.- ~...- to Rt:l ~ 0\' 511"\::>L.E. 'FfT"'lL~ J .~ . , . . - --"-. =-::-"~ ~ .:: \3~o. lto "" E::s 10 ~R, rTRD 01= \35'''11' \ol1l1 11) Wbs T - De.Q. 2-oolo MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Greg Copeland, City Manager Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Sign Code Interpretation - Electronic Reader Boards February 9, 2007 for the February 13 CDRB Meeting INTRODUCTION City staff is requesting an interpretation of the city's sign code in regard to the percentage of time an electronic reader board sign must display public service messages in order to meet city code requirements. 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. City code prohibits electronic reader board signs because they have the capability to blink, flash, flutter, or change in brightness or color and could cause a public nuisance if adjacent residential property or a public safety hazard for traffic. However, city code exempts electronic reader board signs that give public service information, such as time and temperature. Bremer Bank located at 2965 White Bear Avenue has requested a sign permit for an electronic reader board. They propose to install the electronic reader board on the existing freestanding sign along White Bear Avenue. The electronic reader board will be used to advertise loan rates and other banking services. In addition, they will display the time and temperature on the electronic reader board. DISCUSSION Existing Sign Code Language The city's current sign code does not clearly define electronic reader boards, but does have the following pertinent language: Prohibited signs: Signs that have blinking, flashing or fluttering lights or that change in brightness or color. Signs that give public service information, such as time and temperature are exempt. Public service sign means any sign primarily intended to promote items of general interest to the community. Time and temperature sign means a changing sign giving the time and temperature. Draft Sign Code Language The draft sign code was created by the community design review board (CDRB) over a two-year period. The CDRB recommended approval of this code on March 1, 2006. The city council has yet to review the code for possible adoption. The following pertinent language is found in the draft sign code: Prohibited signs: Signs that have blinking, flashing, fluttering lights, make noise, or change in brightness or color except for electronic message boards that display only time and temperature or similar public service messages according to the requirements specifically outlined in this chapter. Public service sign is any sign primarily intended to promote items of general interest to the community. Time and temperature signs are considered a public service sign. A time and temperature sign contains an electronic message board portion that only displays the time and temperature. Other Electronic Reader Board Signs in the City Mvth Sion In 2006, the Myth located at 3090 South lawn Avenue constructed a new freestanding sign along County Road D which included a full color light emitting diode (LED) display. The Myth's LED sign is a state of the art, full color sign capable of taking multiple video signals. The sign clearly has the capability to blink, flash, flutter, and change in brightness or color and should have been prohibited as required by city code. However, due to another city staff person's interpretation of the code, the Myth was issued a sign permit for the installation of the sign. The interpretation had to do with language in the code which allows animated signs (any sign which depicts action or motion) if they are located less than 75 feet from any residential land and do not obstruct the vision of or be confused with a traffic signal or stop sign. On April 25, 2006, the CDRB reviewed city staff's request for an interpretation of city code in regard to the Myth sign. The CDRB and the city attorney agreed that the Myth was issued a sign permit in error and that the LED sign is prohibited based on city code. The CDRB and the city attorney determined that the Myth should obtain a variance in order to retain the sign. City staff met with the manager of the Myth soon after the CDRB's review of the sign and discussed the sign variance requirement. At that time city staff discussed the fact that city code allows signs which blink, flash, flutter, and change in brightness or color if the sign displays public service messages. In the spirit of cooperation, the manager of the Myth agreed to start displaying time and temperature as well as look into the possibility of displaying publiC service messages. If the public service messages were displayed, city staff would interpret the sign as meeting city code requirements and a variance would not be required. Since that time city staff has been monitoring the Myth sign. Time and temperature have been displayed on occasion. City staff also witnessed one public service message on the sign. But it seems clear that the sign is mainly used to advertise the Myth's upcoming shows, and is not "primarily" intended for public service messages. Bank Sions There are three banks in the Maplewood Mall area that have electronic reader board signs. These signs were issued sign permits by the city at least ten or more years ago and were allowed for the display of time and temperature and public service messages. Over the years all of these banks have begun displaying commercial advertisement for their bank services in addition to public service messages. Bremer Bank Request When Bremer Bank first made the request for an electronic reader board sign, city staff indicated that a variance would be required for the sign if it was used for the display of a 2 commercial message. Bremer Bank pointed out the existing electronic reader board signs in the area, including the Myth and other banks near by, which have electronic reader board signs that display commercial messages. Since city code does not specify the percentage of time an electronic reader board has to display a public service message versus a commercial message, Bremer Bank requested an interpretation of the sign code to determine if a variance is actually needed for such a sign. Sign Code Interpretation Since last year, a number of cities around the country have fallen victim to billboard companies challenging their sign codes. The billboard companies have argued that these cities' ordinances suffer from a fatal First Amendment flaw by impermissibly discriminating based on the content of the sign including discriminating against public message versus commercial message. This is clearly something the City of Maplewood should address in our proposed sign code update. City staff and the city attorney will review the draft sign code to ensure it meets the First Amendment requirements and bring any proposed changes to the CDRB before the city council's review of the sign code. Until such time, however, the city must follow its existing sign code and enforce the code consistently. City code states that an electronic reader board sign must be used "primarily" for a public service message. Primarily is loosely described as first and foremost, above all, chiefly, mainly, principally, for the most part, mostly, largely, and predominately. It is difficult to determine what percentage "primarily" would represent. But it is staffs opinion that it should represent at least 75 percent of the time. This means that within any given hour, an electronic reader board must display a public service message for 45 minutes, and the remaining 15 minutes can be of a commercial message. SUMMARY Sign codes are written to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the city and to give guidelines to business for visibility and promotion. It is important to balance the desires of the businesses to the welfare of the citizens and to ensure consistent interpretation and enforcement of the codes. RECOMMENDATIONS City staff recommends that the community design review board offer clarification on the city's sign code pertaining to electronic reader board signs. Interpretation questions to be answered are: 1. What percentage of time should an electronic reader board be required to display a public service message versus a commercial message in order to meet city code requirements? 2. If the CDRB determines city code allows for a certain percentage of public service versus commercial message on an electronic reader board sign, should city staff work with existing electronic reader board sign owners (including the Myth) to ensure this percentage is being met or that a variance from the code is obtained? p:ordlsign codelelectronic readerboard interpretation 3 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Community Design Review Board Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner 2006 Community Design Review Board Annual Report February 8, 2007 INTRODUCTION The city's community design review board (CDRB) ordinance requires that the CDRB submit a report to the city council once a year. The report is intended to outline the CDRB's actions and activities during the preceding year. Also, the report may include recommended changes, including, but not limited to, ordinance and/or procedure changes. RECOMMENDATION Review the attached draft of the CDRB annual report and be prepared to make recommendations and comments on the report at the February 13, 2006, CDRB meeting. P:com-devlcdrblannual report cover memo Attachment: 2006 CDRB Annual Report MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Greg Copeland, City Manager Linda Olson, Community Design Review Board Chair 2006 Community Design Review Board Annual Report February 13, 2007 INTRODUCTION Annually the community design review board (CDRB) reports the board's actions and activities for the city council for the previous year. In 2006, the CDRB reviewed the following 33 items during their 17 meetings: Type of Proposal # Reviewed New Development Proposals 12 1. Ramsey County Public Library - Southlawn Drive, South of Legacy Parkway (Legacy Village) 2. Comforts of Home Assisted Living Facility - 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street 3. Carver Crossing of Maplewood - Henry Lane and Carver Avenue in South Maplewood 4. Legacy Village Townhomes - County Road D and Kennard Street (Legacy Village Development) 5. Carpet Court - 1685 Arcade Street 6. MinnHealth Clinic - Vacant Lot Located to the North of 2055 White Bear Avenue (Across the Street from the Maplewood Community Center) 7. Regent of Legacy Village - Senior Apartments 8. Cottagewood Town House Development - South of Highwood Avenue, east of Dennis Street, west of 1-494 g. Legacy Village Town Homes - Southwest Corner of County Road 0 and Kennard Street (Legacy Village) 10. Crown Plaza Shopping Center (Walgreens) - 1700 Rice Street 11. Walgreens - Northeast Corner of Beam and White Bear Avenues 12. CarMax Auto Superstore - Northeast Corner of Highway 61 and Beam Avenues Expansions/Remodels 7 1. Birch Run Station (Savers) -1741 Beam Avenue 2. Menards (Garden Center Addition and Parking Lot Reconfiguration) - 2280 Maplewood Drive Type of Proposal # Reviewed Expansions/Remodels (continued) 7 3. Second Harvest Heartland (Freezer Addition) - 1140 Gervais Avenue 4. 5-8 Tavern and Grill (Parking Lot Expansion) - 2289 Minnehaha Avenue 5. Hill-Murray School (Field House Addition) - 2625 Larpenteur Avenue East 6. Maple Ridge Retail Center (Exterior Remodel) - 2515 White Bear Avenue 7. Hillcrest Gateway Plaza (Addition and Exterior Remodel) -1698 White Bear Avenue (Hillcrest Village Redevelopment Area) Miscellaneous Reviews and Actions 12 1. Gladstone Redevelopment Concept Plan (Joint Presentation for the Community Design Review Board and Housing and Redevelopment Authority) 2. Gladstone Redevelopment Concept Plan - Recommendation to the City Council 3. Carpet Court Concept Review - 1685 Arcade Street 4. Town Center (Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment for Best Buy) - 1795 County Road D 5. Maplewood Market Place (Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment) - 1275 County Road D 6. Sign Code Interpretation - Electronic Reader Boards 7. Maple Leaf Ridge Business Center (Comprehensive Sign Plan) - 2475/2485/2495 Maplewood Drive 8. Ramsey County Library (Comprehensive Sign Plan) - Southwest Corner of Legacy Parkway and South lawn Road (Legacy Village) 9. Comforts of Home (Comprehensive Sign Plan) - 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street 10. Mounds Park Academy (Comprehensive Sign Plan) - 2051 Larpenteur Avenue 11. Maplewood Mall (Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment) - 3001 White Bear Avenue 12. Boca Chica Taco House (Sign Variance Request) - 1706 White Bear Avenue (Hillcrest Village Redevelopment Area) Special Proiects 2 1. Sign Code Revisions 2. Discussions about Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Area Total 33 2 COMPARATIVE INFORMATION Year Number of Items Reviewed 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 27 25 25 27 33 MEMBERSHIP The CDRB consists of five members appointed by the city council. Membership terms are for two years, with extensions for additional terms approved by the city council. The current membership is as follows: Board Member Membership BeQan Term Expires Ananth Shankar Matt Ledvina Linda Olson Vacancy Vacancy 8/8/94 3/10/97 3/26/01 1/1/08 1/1/09 1/1/09 1/1/09 1/1/08 John Hinzman resigned from the CDRB on November 22, 2006, leaving one vacancy on the board. The term of the vacancy expires January 1, 2008. On January 29, 2007, the city council reappointed Matt Ledvina and Linda Olson to the board for another two-year term which expires January 1, 2009. Joel Schurke's term expired on January 1, 2007. Mr. Schurke chose not to reapply for another term leaving a second vacancy on the board. The city council will be interviewing candidates for the two vacancies in the near future. DISCUSSION 2006 Actions/Activities In 2006, the CDRB reviewed six new commercial developments which could potentially add up to 132,230 square feet of new commercial space to the city if developed; seven commercial expansion/remodels which could potentially add up to 56,635 square feet of new commercial expansion space to the city if developed; and six new multi-family developments which could add up to 565 new residential units to the city if developed. The CORB has consistently demonstrated keen interest and skill in their reviews of these development projects to ensure they are of the quality of design and materials that complement the surrounding areas and improves a site's aesthetics. The city has become more and more developed over the years, with very little vacant land available for new developments. Because of this, city staff has processed many of the city's remodels and additions as 15-day reviews, as allowed by code, rather than the more formal review by the CORBo Also, because of the developed nature of the city, many of the new commercial and residential developments reviewed by the CORB are either redevelopment of existing buildings or 3 in-fill development. The CDRB will continue to be a vital advisory board to the city council in the future, particularly with more redevelopment and in-fill development projects on the horizon. Maplewood's current sign code was adopted in 1977, with minor revisions made in 1996. The sign code is outdated and allows for excessive signage within the commercial and industrial zoning districts. The CDRB recommended in their 2002, 2003, and 2004, and 2005 annual reports that the city's sign code be reviewed for potential modifications and updates. During 2004 and 2005 the CDRB undertook the difficult task of debating and creating a draft sign code. On March 1, 2006, the CDRB recommended approval of the draft sign code. On May 8, 2006, city staff presented highlights of the proposed draft sign code to the city council during a city council workshop. Due to the city council's time constraints in dealing with the 2007 budget and other more immediate issues, further review of the draft sign code by the city council was put on hold. Since last year a number of cities around the country have fallen victim to billboard companies challenging their sign codes. The billboard companies have argued that these cities' ordinances suffer from a fatal First Amendment flaw by impermissibly discriminating based on the content of the sign or who is using it. Based on this, the CDRB will review the March 1, 2006, draft sign code to ensure it is consistent with the First Amendment and will forward the draft sign code to the city council for review and approval. 2006 Recommendations/Areas of Interest 1. The CORB will work with staff on recommended site and design criteria for the city's proposed Gladstone neighborhood redevelopment area. 2. The CORB is interested in gaining a better understanding of sustainable building design concepts. The board hopes to support the implementation of these concepts for projects that are reviewed and approved by the city, particularly projects within the Gladstone neighborhood redevelopment area. 3. The CDRB is interested in gaining a better understanding and working knowledge of the use of pervious surfaces in development - how they function, how they age, and how they relate to the city's codes. 4. The CDRB is interested in exploring specific design standards for new commercial and multi-family developments. 5. The CORB is interested in reviewing and updating the city's landscape requirements for commercial and multi-family developments. 6. The CORB is interested in reviewing and updating the city's on-site parking requirements. CONCLUSION In 2007, the CORB will continue its dedication to the quality design of buildings and developments, ensuring a high quality of life for the citizens of Maplewood. P\com-dev\community design review board\annual report (2006) 4 MEMORANDUM DATE: Community Design Review Board Members Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Election of Community Design Review Board Chairperson and Vice Chairperson February 8, 2007 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION The city code requires that the community design review board elect a chairperson and vice chairperson at the second meeting of January. The 2006 chairperson was Linda Olson and the vice-chairperson was Matt Ledvina. RECOMMENDATION Elect a chairperson and vice chairperson for 2007. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Community Design Review Board Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Community Pride Awards February 8, 2007 for the February 13 CDRB Meeting Board Member Schurke recently requested that staff research Little Canada's Community Pride Awards for possible implementation in the City of Maplewood, particularly in relation to design awards for new or modified commercial and multi-family buildings. I am including the following attachments and information relating to community pride and design awards as follows: 1. Little Canada's Community Pride Awards (attached): The City of Little Canada offers awards for property owners who consistently maintain their property in a well-kept manner or who have made significant and positive improvements. 2. Smart Growth Design Awards (attached): The 1000 Friends of Minnesota offer a Smart Growth Design Award which identifies development patterns that reflect a positive vision for the future including protection of the environment, principles of social equity, and a commitment to sustainable economic growth. 3. American Institute of Architects (AlA) (attached): The AlA awards excellence in architecture, interior architecture, and urban design. 4. RamseylWashington Metro Watershed District Landscape Ecology Awards Program (attached): The landscape ecology awards program recognizes landowners in the RamseylWashington Metro Watershed District that offer good management practices including use of native plants in the landscape, storm water infiltration, creation of buffers, and limited use of fertilizers and pesticides. 5. Hastings' Historic Preservation Awards: Yearly awards are given for historic preservation including remodeling, fa<;:ade improvements, and some new construction for in-fill lots. The historical commission nominates eight to twelve nominees a year and votes on a winner as a commission. The nominees and winner are recognized and awarded a plaque by the city council. Recognition is advertised on the local radio station and newspaper. These award programs represent good background information for a similar type of design award program in the City of Maplewood. If the community design review board is interested in implementing such a program it would be beneficial to include this information in the board's annual report to the city council which will be complete in January 2007. If adopted by the city council, the board can then design criteria for the program. Little Canada -- Community Pride Awards Page 1 of 1 Explore Our City Agendas & Minutes E-mail Updates Useful Links Web Site Map Home Contact Us City Government Community Events Environment Jobs & Volunteering Local News Parks & Recreation Planning, Zoning & Inspections Police & Fire Streets & Utilities In City Government: Agendas & Minutes Cable Channel 16 City Budget City Ordinances Comment Form Community Survey Results Elections Goal Setting Session Results Mayor & Council National & State Elected Officials Permits & Licenses Property Taxes Search Community Pride Awards The City of Little Canada is seeking nominations for the Annual Community Pride Awards. These awards will be made to selected property owners who consistently maintain their property in a well-kept manner or who have made significant and positive improvements. This year awards will be presented for residential and commercial categories. Any resident or property owner can nominate a candidate(s) for this recognition. The presentations commemorating these awards will be made during the Canadian Days Celebration opening ceremonies on Friday, August 4,2006. The amount of money spent will not be a criteria for this award. Rather, the use of the property and compatibility with the neighborhood will be considered. If the efforts undertaken make the neighborhood better, that property owner should be nominated. This is what community pride is all about! You may nominate any residence or business using the form provided below. Pictures are helpful and encouraged. The deadline for submission is Friday, Ju/y 7, 2006. Call the City Center at 651-766-4029 with questions. Please help us recognize those residents and business owners who make Little Canada a better place in which to live and work! I!!ii 2006 Nomination Form Printer~friendly Version This is the official web site of the City of Little Canada, Minnesota. Home I City Government I Community Events I Environment I Jobs & Volunteering I Local News I Parks & Recreation I Planning, Zoning & Inspections I Police & Fire I Streets & Utilities I Explore Our City I Agendas & Minutes I E-mail UPdates I Useful Links I Web Site Map I Contact Us I Home powered by GovOffice,com CD http://www.ci.1ittle-canada.mn.us/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7b65C3188D-IA23-4A67-9A69-6...11/21/2006 Community Survey... Results are Available Linle Canada residents are in a very opti- mistic and satisfied mood according to a tele- phone survey of citizens recently completed by Decision Resources, Ltd. This mood is linked to three \'v'idespread perceptions: high quality city services. solid linkage to city government and moderating concerns about taxes. These issues have positively impacted the quality of life ratings. approval of the actions of the City Council and City Statf, and feelings of empow- erment in city policy-making At the present time, residents are gener- ally satisfied with city development and rede- vdopment elfons, They endorse the clli,)rts on Rice Street and favor using tax incentives to selectively target further development In Jk1.rticular, they want more amenities: retail shopping opportunities, especially' a gracel)' store, entertainment opportunities. and dining establishments The Cllrren ecreation fadl and programs are well-used and vel)' wel!- rated. Participa- tlOnmcltyrecre- ational programs is high, The city has established a Quality of Life Rating "00 .~ ..~' ~ strong reputatIon for protecting the environment Residents, also, express strong interest in pas- sive recreation facilities, particularly wildlit~ V1CW1l1g areas City services are rated satisfactorily by most residents. In particular, park mainte- nance and snow plowing are rated very highly Contrary to results in other suburbs, no city services posted dissatisfaction rates in excess of thirty percent Both City Council members Re-establishment of Community Pride Committee Would you like 10 serve on our Commu- nity Pride Committee') The City Council is interested in re.establishing the Community Pride Committee if there is enough interest. This Committee was originally established in April 1994 and was able to accomplish several projects that fostered community identity and pride These projects induded the coordina- tion and sale of a city clothing line sporting our logo. the installation of new city entrance signs, and establishment of the Community Pride Awards Program. However. the Commit- tee eventually disbanded due to lack of com- mittee members. If enough interest is shown from the resi- dential and business communities. it is an- ticipated the Committee will meet monthly at Little Canada City Center. 515 Little Canada Road East. Dates and times ofthese meetings will be established by Committee Members to accommodate their schedules Areas of responsibility ""ill include advising the City Council on issues related to continued promo- tion of community identity and beautification involving code enforcement and community development Please contact Dotty Norgard at 651-766- 4034 if interested nadien City of Lillie Canada's Newsletter 515 Little Canada Road East Little Canada, MN 55117-160U PRSRTSTD l:S. POST,\OF "AID SI.F".."I.!,I:-i PermitNo,S91S ECR WSS Poiital Customer + Results, cOnl..from page I and City Staff are rak>d positively by a majority of residcnts~ the ninc- to-one favorable-to-unfavorable rating oCthe Mayor and City Council is outstanding, and the City Staff is viewed almost as highly While the City of Little Canada remains in transition, the major task facing decision~makers will be challenging: preserving the aspt:cts of "small town ambience and strong neighborhoods." key to so many residents, while guiding city grol,',th responsive to residential needs However, the City has one key advantage many other suburbs do not possess: a large reservoir of good will from past actions. as well as, solid confidence in the way present issues are being addressed For an executive summary ofthe survey results, please visir our web site at wW\v ci.little-canada.mn.us A presentation 011 the survey' results ,vill also be broadcast on Little Canada's Channel 16 beginning mid-June for interested viewers This presentation \-vill be available o II using a k locat r web Nominate Your Neighbor for a Community Pride Award! Many of Little Canada's residents and business- es take pride in their property and our community, The City of Litt]e Canada likes to recognize those who maintain their homes or businesses in a weH- kept manner. We need your assistance in nominat- ing those residents and business O\vners whom you feel have done an excellent job in keeping our city attractive for visitors and residents Nomination fonns are available on our web site at www.ci.littlc- canada mil us or 'you can pick up a form at Little Canada City Center Include pictures and submit your forms to the City Center by Friday, Ju(\' 7, 2006, The presentation of these awards will be made at the Canadian Days festival in August Call 651-766-4034 with questions Ii. 1'- ity's Goose Control P gram According t e urvC'} s just c ted. of 'lewed preferred to see the Goose Management Program continue due to overpopulation ofthe birds, the health hazards that ex- ist trom their droppings, and the traffic problems that are created. The City Council held a public hearing on Wednesday, May 10.2006. to address this issue Dr, James Cooper of the University of Minnesota was present to answer questions on the matter. (A copy of the minutes is al'ailable on our web site at www.ci little.canada.mnu$,) Based on the survey results and the public hearing presentation, the City Council decided to continue with the annual management program Complete eradication orthe birds is not our goal. but we desire to properly man- age their population. The decision as to ,...hich areas will be tar- geted will be made after an initial inventory of tile city is completed Round.up will occur in early June to early July. Unweave the Weave Update B.~' Kent Barntlfd. Mn/DOT Communications Specialist Construction activity has been in full force this spring 011 "Unweave the Weave" to rebuild the interchanges of Interstates 35E and 694 along with their common sections in Little Canada and Vadnais Heights. Construction of bypasses in the project area is underway. Once they are completed. trallic will be shifted to these bypasses, as the permanent lanes are built, Bypasses for the following movements are currently under construction' Northbound 1-351:'. traffiC from Little Canada Road to County Road E; Sourhbound 1-3SE traffic from County Road E to Highway .16; WestooundJ-6'l4trafficlfomLaboreRoadtoRiccStreet;anJ Eastbound '-694 traffic from Rice Street to Labore Road This project contains numerous bypasses throughout the three-year construction period. Current bypass work is mainly to handle traffic during this year's construction activity Work continues on two new bridges on the east end of the Unweave commons and rum bridges on the ''',-est side of the lJml/eave commons Two temporary bridges also are under construction to carry traffic during work on the west side interchange ofl.35E and 694 These bridges are part of the bypasses being built in that area. Additional work includes construction of a retaining wal] just north of Little Canada Road along northbound 1-35E. The ramp from Little Canada Road to southbound 1-35E also closed on April 27 for construction ofa new fourth lane oftratT1c on the southbound side of the interstate between Little Canada Road and High","ay 36. This ramp is expected to open again in June 1000 Friends of Minnesota: Land Conservation Tools #1 Page 1 of9 \.-- Smart Growth Design Awards We have a choice about how the Twin Cities will grow - either uncontrolled, sprawling development can shape the future, or we can shape development to create a healthy, livable Twin Cities region. The Smart Growth Design Awards (SGDA) identify those development patterns that reflect a positive vision for the future. A vision that includes protection of the environment, principles of social equity and a commitment to sustainable economic growth. What do Smart Growth Design Award Winners Receive? . Recognition before their peers at a dinner. . A plaque to be displayed as a lasting testament to the project's success. . Recognition in 1000 Friends of Minnesota's publications, including our quarterly newsletter and website. . Increased public awareness of your good work. Projects are Judged on Five General Attributes: 1. LAND USE -Developments are compatible with and connect to surrounding features, are compatible with the community's vision of its future, protect and/or link to open space and natural features, connect to services and jobs, and are more densely developed to utilize land efficiently. 2. DESIGN - Developments are attractive to potential buyers, provide housing that accommodates a range of incomes and lifestyles, include meaningful open space and outdoor recreational opportunities within their boundaries, offer a mix of uses, and consider resource efficiency. 3. INFRASTRUCTURE - Developments make efficient use of existing infrastructure, minimize contribution to traffic congestion, incorporate connections to transit service, are accessible to pedestrians, and do not overload infrastructure like stormwater, sewer, water, roads, and schools http://www.IOOOfom.orglsgda_info.htm 12/6/2006 1000 Friends of Minnesota: Land Conservation Tools #1 Page 60f9 4. PLANNING PROCESS - Developments are supportive of comprehensive plans. Smart Growth communities encourage public participation in the process of planning and development, and frequently participate in Livable Communities and other community sustainability programs. 5. AFFORDABILlTY - Developments include housing that is accessible to a range of household incomes. Because of efficiency and design, Smart Growth developments are better able to provide a variety of housing choices, including affordable housing. Nominee Requirements 1. Must have been completed no earlier than January 1, 1990 and no later than March 1,2004. (This may be applied to the relevant phase of a multi-phased project.) Must have a completed phase. 2. Must be located within the 7 -county metro area. 3. The scale of the project can range from a single building to the neighborhood level. 4. Must not convert lands identified as critical natural areas in a County Biological Surveyor local plan. 5. The project can include any combination of residential, mixed use, commercial or industrial development. List of 2003 SGDA Winners .. . , / /' 2004 SmartGJQw:thD~u~igll AwardWil'!l1!m~ AI'lI1QI.I-'lCQd This mixed-use project with lofts above and retail below has helped the City achieve its goal of bringing new energy and economic stability back to this suburban main street. The close involvement of local stakeholders ensured that the finished product carried out the goals of the broader community. Careful attention to architectural detail creates a visually interesting streetscape and reinforces the historic nature of the downtown area. By bringing residents to Main Street Hopkins, Marketplace Lofts has brought new life to this suburban downtown and serves as an excellent example of small-scale downtown revitalization. .. Neighborhood Housing Infill - New Bridge, St. Paul Building/Block Scale - Marketplace Lofts, Hopkins This residential urban infill development employed New Urbanist principles of small lot sizes, front porches, rear garages, sidewalks and narrow streets to increase the density and livability of this neighborhood. The style of the homes compliments that of the surrounding SI. Paul neighborhoods and brings the amenities of association- maintained living to the City. The relatively high density of the development kept housing costs down and allowed for much of the adjacent open space to be preserved. Neighborhood Housing and Workplace Infill - Excelsior Tech Center and Regency Development, Hopkins I' - /.. ;/ .'11, ~-, ;1: . -., , . .. , This project renovated the abandoned Ailiant Techsystems defense plant into a mixed-business center that includes office space, warehouse/manufacturing space, mini-storage and production space. A neighborhood with rowhomes and detached town homes was constructed on the surface parking lots bringing additional housing adjacent to this job center. The homes reflect the architectural style of a nearby historic neighborhood with rear garages, front porches and sidewalks connecting the neighborhood to a regional trail system. This creative solution to a difficult problem has brought housing and jobs together and turned a blighted industrial property into a community amenity without the use of public subsidies. 6 , ~ i /' .,,' This extensive redevelopment of Excelsior Boulevard incorporates retail space, mixed income housing, a park, amphitheater, and community gathering space to implement the community's vision of a walkable town center. By paying careful attention to the needs of all users, Excelsior and Grand has created both a strong pubiic realm for the community and private amenities for its residents. The success of this project demonstrates how a thoughtful integration of uses can transform a biighted, suburban arterial into an active, thriving town center. Town Center Redevelopment- Excelsior and Grand, St. Louis Park The City of Richfield undertook the redevelopment of Wood lake Centre as one step in implementing the City's town center revitaiization plan. Selective infill was used to improve the street presence of the existing buildings at this prominent intersection that was once dominated by surface parking. The construction of a parking ramp on-site created room for an assisted living facility as well as a public plaza and sculpture garden. Townhomes with a mix of market-rate and affordable rents were constructed on an adjacent parcel increasing housing choices in Richfield's downtown area. Wood lake Centre is an excellent example of using selective infill to transform a low-density, single- use site into a dense, mixed-use urban center. City/Regional Scale - The Phalen Corridor, St. Paul Town Center Infill - Wood lake , Centre, Richfield This long-term community vision has engaged public and private partners to bring St. Paul's East Side back from years of decline. The construction of Phalen Boulevard along a polluted rail corridor has provided access to many brownfield sites that have been redeveloped into productive job centers. Over 1000 jobs have been brought back to the community on land that was previously polluted auto junkyards, scrap yards, and industrial sites. In addition to job creation, 94 housing units have been completed to date with more than 650 to be added in the next three years providing housing at a range of incomes and needs. Recreational opportunities have been provided by expanding two state bike trails; creating a YMCA; building a skate park, climbing wall and playing fields; and restoring four wetlands, one of which was formerly a parking lot. By making the East Side of St. Paul a vital place to live, work and recreate, The Phalen Corridor has had a tremendous impact at both the city and regional scale. . I / .,,' - .......1.1t".II.,.....~ ..-- ---- traditional Minneapc 2006 AlA Honor Awards Recognize Excellence in Architecture, Interiors, and Urban Design Page lof6 .AIA ,g Pnnt this page 2006 AlA Honor Awards Recognize Excellence in Architecture, Interiors, and Urban Design I ~ E.mall this page For Immediate Release Washington, D.C., January 13,2006 - The American Institute of Architects (AlA) announced today the 2006 recipients of the AlA Institute Honor Awards, the profession's highest recognition of works that exemplifY excellence in architecture, interior architecture, and urban design. Selected from over 680 total submissions, 30 recipients will be honored in June at the AlA 2006 National Convention and Design Exposition in Los Angeles. Contact: Cara Battaglini 202.626.7462 carab@)aia.org 2006 Institute Honor AWIIJ"ds fo,.AJ"J:llit~cture: "There was a wide variety of projects selected from the over 400 entries the jury reviewed for 2006. The jury was interested in projects that fit their context whether it was a chapel, an office building, a campus infill or urban intervention," said Jury Chair Robert E. Hull, F AlA, from The Miller/Hull Partnership in Seattle. "The diverse background of the jury insured that our selections appealed to a wide range of architectural design. In our deliberations and site visits there was the realization of the special qualities, vitality, and importance that great architecture brings to our society. The projects selected for the 2006 honor awards are a celebration of our profession's continued vitality." Ballard Library and Neighborhood Service Center, Seattle, by Bohlin Cywinski Jackson, for the Seattle Public Library The first major building designed and built within its neighborhood's new municipal center master plan, this project's library and service center share a gently sloping site adjacent to a city park currently under construction. The structure draws on the community's Scandinavian and maritime roots, all the while anticipating its projected demographics of a younger, more diverse population. Bigelow Chapel, New Brighton, Minn., by Hammel, Green and Abrahamson Inc., for the United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities This 5,OOO-square-foot chapel serves an ecumenical graduate and professional school oftheology that houses 250 students of all faiths-from Roman Catholic to Jewish to Unitarian. Rather than thinking of the chapel as a Christian worship space, the architect set forth to embody a "trinity of spiritual qualities" in intimacy, warmth, and light. The space captures intimacy and warmth through use of rippling, honey-colored, translucent, 32-inch-deep maple panels; light streams through the panels and from clerestories and skylights. Frieder Burda Collection Museum, Baden-Baden, Germany, by Richard Meier & Partners Architects LLP, with associate architect Peter W. Kruse-Freier Architekt, for Sammhmg Frieder Burda This new museum for a private collection harmonizes with its surrounding public park as well as an adjacent Kunsthalle, or art museum. A glass-enclosed bridge connects the new museum to the existing one and shows proper respect to its venerable neighbor by touching its fa9ade as gently as possible. Children's Museum of Pittsburgb, PittSburgh, by Koning E~enberg Architecture, witb Perkins Eastman Architects PC, for Children's Museum of Pittsburgh The architects say this museum expansion was inspired by the Chinese proverb that instructs parents to give their children two things: roots and wings. The project expands an existing museum from its home in an 1897 post office m'" ~ "'joc~' pl~,"ri~ tim, Imd 100' ,too<! =~, (~ http://www.aia.org/print_template.cfm?pagename=release_011306 honorawards 1 /2006 2006 AlA Honor Awards Recognize Excellence in Architecture, Interiors, and Urban Design Page 2 of6 Joseph A. Steger Student Life Center, University ()fCinf:i1mati, by MlIlIre RubleYudell Architects & Planners, with associate arf:hitect glaserwllrks, for the University of Cinf:inUllti This 114,700-square-foot building housing administrative classrooms, computer labs, retail, and food service, as well as a restored 1920s classroom, is a dynamic part of a new spine of campus activity organized along major pedestrian and topographic paths. Museo Picasso Malaga, Malaga, Spain, by Gluckman Mayner Architects, with associate architect Camara/Martin Delgado Arquitectos, for Fundacion Museo Picassll Malaga This museum, dedicated to the works of Pablo Picasso, graces the historic city center of Malaga, the artist's birthplace. The architects fully restored the 16-century Palacio de Buenavista to house the main entry and permanent collection galleries within a project that also included inserting six new buildings into the urban fabric to enclose some 80,000 square feet. TRUMPF Customer and Administration Building, Dit:i!:ingen, Germany, by Barkow Leibinger Architects, for TRUMPF GmbH + Co. KG Situated between the Autobahn and the existing buildings of a high-tech machine-tool company, this new building for 300 employees creates a new entry courtyard for visitors and customers. The architects worked with three crystalline- formed volumes at the base of the building-lobby, auditorium, and exhibition spaces-and built up at split-level increments to the sixth floor. Visiting Artists House, Geyserville, Calif., by Jim Jennings Architecture, for Stephen H. Oliver This 1,700-square-foot residence of two suites accessible to studios serves artists commissioned to work onsite at a former northern California sheep ranch. The architects defined the structure with two 200-foot-long poured-in-place concrete walls that "slice along the crest of a hill, retaining the earth along the length of the cut and carving out prescribed areas for indoor and outdoor living." The sleeping areas offer private views of the landscaping, which includes a small lake that also feeds water of constant temperature to the building's mechanical systems. Washington Convention Center, Washington, D.C., by TVS - D&P Mariani PLLC; with associate architects Thompson Ventulett Stainback PC, Devrouax & purnell Architects Planners PC, and Mariani Architects Engineers PC; for the Washington Convention Center Authority The design team faced the challenge of creating the largest enclosed gathering space in the nation's capital: 2.3 million square feet on a 600,000-square-foot footprint that stretched across six vacant lots. The result is the first vertically stacked, long-span convention center in the country. Given the relatively small footprint and the city's strict height limits, the architects devised a spatial "sandwich" that buried one of the exhibit halls underground and elevated the other, so that lobbies, meeting rooms, and registration spaces could be at ground level. Washington State Legislative Building Rehabilitation, Olympia, Wash., by SRG Partnership Inc., with associate architect Einhorn Yaffee Prescott, for Washington State General Administration The challenge with the 1920s, 300,000-gross-square-foot, four-story brick-and-stone structure that was on the verge of collapse was to extend its life expectancy for another 50 years. The team succeeded in installing all new heating, cooling, plumbing, and fire-protection systems while keeping the historic features of the building intact. Additionally, the capitol dome-via its 16 columns-was reinforced to withstand a severe earthquake. William J. Clinton Presidential Center, Little Rock, Ark. byPolshek Partnership Architects; with associate architects Polk Stanley R()wland CUr:l:on PlIrter Architects Ltd, WitsellEvans RaScO Architects and Planners, and Woods Caradine Architects; for the William J. Clinton Foundation While the principal design goals-to create an inviting, memorable, and inspiring place, and a visually and intellectually accessible destination-seem in the mainstream for a presidential library, this project represents a radical departure from its predecessors in that its site selection intended to rehabilitate a derelict area of abandoned warehouses. 2006Im.ti(/{(e Honor Awards fo,. Interior Architec:ture "The 2006 projects included a diverse range of sizes and types of interior projects representing the variety of design http://www.aia.org/print template.cfm?pagename=releaseOl1306 honorawards 12/6/2006 2006 AlA Honor Awards Recognize Excellence in Architecture, Interiors, and Urban Design Page 3 of6 approaches and creative abilities of architects. The recipients represented a variety of scales, from a research laboratory in Massachusetts, to a floral studio in Florida, and of project types that included large and small office environments, academic and institutional buildings, a residence, and two theaters," said Jury Chair Linda Sear!, FAIA, Searl and Associates Architects in Chicago. "We found that universally the honored designs were a clear expression of the client's personality and requirements, and the design concepts represented a fresh and inventive approach, reinforced by the appropriate use of materials, lighting, and color." Bizarre, Omaha, by Randy BrQwn Arcbitects, fOr Djel Brown This women's boutique offered the architects an opportunity to challenge the typical retail store conventions "where the walls, fixtures, ceilings, and floors are all separate elements," they say. The space's narrow bay is divided into an enclosed space and an open space that contains a series of equally spaced pods to organize the merchandise. English Residence, Beverly Hills, Calif., by Chu + Gooding Architects and interior designer Kay Kollar Design, for Tobias Emmericb The owners ofthis mid-century Modem glass house by Harwell Hamilton Harris charged the architects with restoring the building to Harris' original architectural intention while meeting the needs of their contemporary lifestyle. The architects used the existing caissons and basement slab to restore the original footprint of a service wing on the lower and upper levels while reconfiguring interior walls, gaining back the original design's two bedrooms, bath, kitchen, family room, and breakfast room-plus space on the basement level for a gym. Google Headquarters, Mountain View, Calif., by Clive Wilkinson Architects, for GoogIe Inc. The master plan for this project, which resulted from a strategic workplace reevaluation and need to expand by a renowned Internet company, follows a simple distribution of work "neighborhoods" along a "Main Street" circulation plan. All share resources-meeting rooms, "tech talk" spaces, micro-kitchens, and library lounge-and find their homes along Main Street. Karla, Miami, by Rene Gon:zale:z Architect Inc, for Karla Conceptual Event Experiences The architects' magic turned an industrial warehouse and adjacent overgrown vacant lot into a flexible space that fosters large-scale production of floral arrangements as well as the staging of events for the local corporate and entertainment community. Throughout the project, spaces and fixtures were designed and chosen with simplicity of form and material to maximize effect while staying within a budget. Mother London, London, by Clive Wilkinson Architects, for MotherSpace for this advertising agency, which grew in six years from a six-person operation to the number one agency in Britain, had to treble the workspace for the staff and capture a radical attitude that embraces a completely flat organizational curve. Everyone in the firm works around a single work table, which has grown progressively larger as the staff expanded. Working within the client- selected three-floor, 42,000-square-foot existing warehouse, the architect transformed the top floor, which boasts 13- foot ceilings and 14,000 square feet of open area, into the primary work area. Nissan Design America, Farmington Hills, Mich., by design architect Luce et Studio Architects, with executive architect Albert Kahn Associates, Inc. for Nissan Design America The client challenged the architect to create a "synergistic, creative work environment that would strike a balance between the frank industrial nature of the program and architectural sophistication" by adding a wing for automotive design that would allow a seamless evolution from conception to prototype. Featuring a 20-foot-tall pivoting stainless steel door as well as a 20-foot-tall projecting screen, the public space allows the staff to communicate through visual images, creating a "public landscape of the design process." The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, Houston, by DMJM RoUet, for the Royal Bank of Scotland pic The design team needed to create an office environment for an international bank client that had recently split into two groups, allowing each group its own identity while also creating some communal space for them to share. The architects employed a "box-within-a-box" concept for the public areas while maximizing the light and views that come with the client's location on the 65th floor of a Pei Cobb Freed building. Using a subtle form of branding, the interior motif plays on the concept of pattern and grids within a Scottish tartan rather than employing decorative http://www.aia.org/print_template.cfm?pagename=release_ 011306_ honorawards 12/6/2006 2006 AlA Honor Awards Recognize Excellence in Architecture, Interiors, and Urban Design Page 4 of6 motifs or overt logos. Schepens Eye Research Institute Laboratory Renovation, Boston, Payette for Schepens Eye Research Institute The architects used studies in transparency, translucency, and contrasts in color and texture to completely transform 64,000 square feet of "tired" lab space into three floors of state-of-the-art molecular biology research environment. A racetrack corridor scheme became an open laboratory design that enhances the interaction among research groups and dramatically increases the amount of assignable lab and lab support space. The renovation takes full advantage of large perimeter windows to maximize the amount of natural light and the loft-like feeling of the space. Skillman Library, Lafayette College, Easton, Pa., by Ann Beha Architects, for Lafayette College The architect strove to expand and transform an undervalued and underappreciated 1964 library of 75,000 square feet into a new learning center where students can work collaboratively and at the same time establish a connection with surrounding buildings, circulation paths, and landscaping lacking in the original design. On its main level, the center-with the addition of 30,000 square feet, now offers a large and flexible "information studio," with a cafe, casual reading areas, meeting areas, group study rooms, digital project rooms, a gallery, and computer rooms. Temporary Theater, Portland, Ore., by BOORA Architects, for the Portland Institute for Contemporary Art Designed for an institute of contemporary art that each year presents a festival for contemporary performances of theater, dance, music, and electronic media, this project turned an empty warehouse into a performance venue with a 200-seat theater and a cabaret stage, plus an ancillary bar and cafe. The architects delineated the theater space from the rest of the warehouse with a wall of scaffolding that hid production equipment. Additional scaffolding provided seating, and an overhead gantry crane served as home for the theatrical lighting. Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company, Washington, D.C., by Mcinturff Architects, for the Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company To provide a first-time home for an edgy-production theater company that has been entertaining Washington, D.C., for 25 years, a developer offered space-to be designed via a publicly funded competition-for the rent of $1 per year. Embedded deep within a large residential/commercial building at 14 feet below street level, the developer provided finished exterior facades and a concrete shell, leaving interior fitout to the theater. 2006 Institute llQI].()rAwardsfor Regional and Urban Design "The jury reviewed a broad spectrum of submissions from the smallest scale projects to the largest proposal for the transportation framework for the new nation of Palestine. The awards recognized projects that best demonstrated the application of sustainable design principles to creatively use open space and density to advance social, economic and environmental health," said Jury Chair Diane T. Georgopulos, FAlA, of Mass Housing Finance Agency in Boston. "Some projects were of significant excellence because of the masterful coordination of open space, access corridors, and built form within historic, brownfield, or institutional urban contexts. Other projects invented new analytical techniques that hold promise to become approaches the profession may profitably employ in the future." The Arc: A Formal Structure for a Palestinian State, West Bank and Gaza, Palestine, by Suisman Urban Design, for the RAND Corporation Palestine's crumbling infrastructure presents a major challenge for a new Palestinian state, where the population is predicted to reach 6.6 million by 2020. This project represents a concept for developing the physical infrastructure of a new independent Palestine as well as a tangible symbol of Palestinian statehood and progress. The team focused on construction of a new international airport and seaport, linking the ports of the West Bank via transport facilities, development of new infrastructure for seaside tourism, and the physical and economic rehabilitation of the urbanized areas of Gaza. The project directs population and urban growth to the West Bank. Chippewa/Cree Reservation Plan, Box Elder, Mont., by Ferdinand S. Johns, AlA, with Allison Orr and the Community Design Center, Montana Stlile University (MSU) School of Architecture, for the Chippewa/Cree Tribal Council The design team worked hard to find a means of gathering information from community members after tribal leaders asked for help in developing a 50-year master plan for the Rocky Boy's Chippewa/Cree Reservation in northern http://www.aia.org/print_template.cfm?pagename=release_ 011306_ honorawards 12/6/2006 2006 AlA Honor Awards Recognize Excellence in Architecture, Interiors, and Urban Design Page S of6 Montana, which is expected to grow in population from 3,000 to 19,000 by 20S0. Although the 130,000-acre landscape is extraordinarily beautiful, physical, economic, and social conditions are extremely poor. And, though tribal leaders were eager to participate, community members were not, perhaps disappointed and distrustful after years of planning efforts and little results. The design team finally proposed five alternative master planning scenarios depicted through photo montages, through which they were able to glean vigorous feedback from tribal members and leaders alike, establishing a direction for future development. Lloyd Crossing Sustainable Urban Design Plan, Portland, Ore., by Mithun Architects + Designers + Planners, for the Portland Development Corporation This plan for a 3S-block district defines a vision founded on aggressive low environmental impact and high economic potential for the neighborhood. Its key goals include transforming an underused inner-city neighborhood into a vibrant, attractive, and highly desirable place to live and work; accommodating a five-fold increase in the area's population and built space; and restoring the ecosystem to mimic the behavior of a pristine forest and achieve key elements of a pre-development environmental impact level. Millennium Park, Chicago, by Skidmore Owings & Merrill LLP, for the City of Chicago, Millennium Park Donors, Millennium Park Inc., and Lakefront Millennium Managers Inc. SOM served as master planners and master architect, design architect for the ice rink, architect for the promenade, and structural engineers for the band shell and pedestrian bridge. The project's associate architects are: Teng & Associates (Grant Park North Garage), Frank O. Gehry and Associates Inc. (Jay Pritzker Pavilion), Gustafson Guthrie Nichol Ltd. (Lurie Gardens), Muller & Muller (Bicycle Station), Hammond Beeby Rupert and Ainge (Harris Theater for Music and Dance and the Exelon North Pavilions), Kureck & Sexton Architects (Crown Fountain), OWP/P (peristyle and architect of record for the Ice Rink), Renzo Piano (design architect of Exelon South Pavilions), McDonough Associates (architect of record for Chase Promenade and Exelon Pavillions), and Harley Ellis Devereaux (Boeing Galleries). The Millennium Park, offering a wide range of activities, completes Chicago's 100- year vision of Grant Park. It incorporates a multimodal transit center, performing arts facilities of Chicago Music and Dance, a new band shell, Great Lawn, and bridge. A former eyesore in the center of the city, the park, under current executive director/project director Edward K. Uhlir, F AlA, Millennium Park Inc., now offers a new and exciting people-friendly destination for Chicagoans and visitors alike. North Point, municipalities of Cambridge, Boston, and Somerville, Mass., by CBT/Childs Bertman Tseckares Inc., with associate architect Greenberg Consultants Inc., for Spaulding & Slye Colliers and Guilford Transportation Industries This project creates a new, transit-oriented, S.2-million-square-foot neighborhood on a 4S-acre parcel. Formerly a railroad yard, the project will transform underused industrial land into a vibrant mixed community. It calls for 20 new city blocks, a state-of-the-art MBT A transit station, 10 acres of green space with a large central park, an extension of the Minuteman Bike Trail, nearly a mile of new roadway and utility infrastructure, plus a wide array of public amenities and improvements. Swiss Government Piazza, Bern, Switzerland, by Lee & Mundwiler Architects, with associate architect Stauffenegger & Stutz for the City of Bernffietbauamt, Switzerland The City of Bern serves as Switzerland's capital, and its medieval center is a UNESCO World Heritage site. The heart of the center itself is the Swiss Parliament Building, fronted by the Federal Plaza, which, despite its historical significance, had never been the subject of an urban design plan. An international design competition led to the current solution, which allows the plaza to function as a prelude to official state events and still allow it to be used as a public space for markets, political demonstrations, and tourist visits. Martin Luther King Plaza Revitalization, Philadelphia, by Torti Gallas and Partners, for Uni-Penn LLC and Philadelphia Housing Authority - Universal The site was the home of a high-rise public housing project that was bringing down its working-class neighborhood just south of downtown Philadelphia. The solution to return the area to health entails SO percent of new construction to be located on the site of the demolished towers and the rest as extensive renovation and infill development in the surrounding community. The architect employed a neighborhood focal center, neighborhood park, and new rowhouse http://www.aia.org/print_template.cfm?pagename=release_ 011306_ honorawards 12/612006 2006 AlA Honor Awards Recognize Excellence in Architecture, Interiors, and Urban Design Page 60f6 streets patterned on Philadelphia neighborhood traditions. University Square, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, by Moore Ruble Yudell Architects & Planners, with associate architf;!ct Hughes Condon Marler: Architects, for UBC Properties Trust This project's vision is to establish a flagship "gateway" neighborhood that will welcome the world to the university and further its goals of designing and building a sustainable and socially vibrant university town. The program calls for two buildings to be constructed over an underground transit station. These mixed-use buildings will contribute to formation of "University Square," a new public open space. About The American Institute of Architects For almost ISO years, members of The American Institute of Architects have worked with each other and their communities to create more valuable, healthy, secure, and sustainable buildings and cityscapes. AlA members have access to the right people, knowledge, and tools to create better design, and through such resources and access, they help clients and communities make their visions real. www.aia.org Note to Editors: High resolution images andfact sheets are available to the media. Please contact Cara Battaglini in the AlA media relations office with your request at 202.626. 7462 or email carab@aia.org ### tI 200S The American Institute of Architects I www.aia.org http://www.aia.org/print_template.cfm?pagename=release_ 011306_ honorawards 12/6/2006 LEAP-Landscape Ecology Awards Program WAN'DD: NomIn... for ._ Laadscape 100101' Iwards Program IMPORTANT DATES: Application Deadline: July 1 st Winners Selected: Mid-September THE PROGRAM: The Landscape Ecology Awards Program recognizes landowners in the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District, including private residences as well as public and commercial properties, that use good management practices to preserve and improve water quality and natural resources. The District's Natural Resources Board manages this program and conducts all judging. Awards are given annually. HOW TO NOMINATE: Enter your property or one belonging to a friend, neighbor, business, school or city by completing a nomination form. JUDGING: Based on good management practices, including use of native plants in the landscape, storm water infiltration, creation of buffers, and limited use of fertilizers and pesticides. AWARDS: Winner will receive an attractive sign to be placed on their property, a plaque, a gift certificate for native plants, recognition in local newspapers and on the District's we site. ELIGIBILITY: Properties must be within the District boundaries. A map is available on this website, or by calling the District office. FOR MORE INFORMATION: To obtain a nomination form, print the pdf version from this website, or call the District at (651) 792-7950 . Photos of the 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 award- winning properties are posted here - follow the links. . The Watershed District's Natural Resources Board, composed of citizen volunteers, manages this program and conducts all judging. . The deadline for nominations for the 2007 award is July 1st, 2007. . Click this link for a copy of the application form. LEAP Application (pdf file, 190kb) RamlI_-WalIhlnglol1 Metro D18trlct Landscape Ecology Awards Application Form Your name: Address: City: Zip: Phone: If you are nominating a landowner, please fill out the following: Nominee: Address: City: Zip: Phone: What impresses you about the site? Is the person/organization being nominated aware of this nomination? DYes o No Please check appropriate boxes in this survey. (You may check multip/e boxes for some of the questions). 1. Which best describes the area nominated for this award? o Whole site (e.g., yard, school) o Specific project (e.g., butterfly garden, innovative parking lot, etc.) Please specify the type of project. 2. Which category best describes the site? o Residence o Business o Industrial o Government o School o Church o Other (please specify) Note: If you are nominating someone else, stop here and submit this form to the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. The owner will be contacted and asked to complete the remaining questions. 3. What are your specific land stewardship goals for your property? (e.g., preserve, enhance or create native woodland, wetland or prairie, establish a butterfly garden, reduce maintenance costs, reduce the amount of impervious surface, etc.) 4. Give a rough breakdown of your site: Size (acres or sq. fl) % Lawn % Hard surfaces % Natural areas % Gardens % Other 5. How long ago did you begin to implement land stewardship practices on your site? 6. Check all of the good management practices you use in handling your grass clippings. D Compost your grass clippings D Mulch your grass clippings D Keep clippings off hard surfaces D Don't cut grass lower than 3 inches in the summer D Other 7. How do you manage fallen leaves? (Check all that apply) Mulching is the process of grinding leaves into small pieces that can either be left in place, composted, or placed as mulch around plants in gardens or landscape plantings to deter weed growth and retain moisture. When composting leaves, select a site away from your lake, wetiand or impervious surfaces to prevent nutrients from running off into surface waters. D Mulch leaves and leave them in place D Mulch leaves, then pick them up and use them in a garden or landscape planting on your property D Collect leaves and remove them from your property o Compost the leaves On site County compost site D Clear leaves from gutters D Refrain from raking leaves into the street D Let leaves lie on natural area 8. How often do you rake and compost your leaves? o As soon as they fall (multiple times) D One time each fall 9. Describe your fertilizer use on your lawn. (Check all that apply) D No fertilizer is used D Organic fertilizer is used o Only phosphorous free fertilizer is used because local soils are high in phosphorus D Fertilizer that contains phosphorous is used. If you checked this item, have you completed a soil test of your lawn indicating that phosphorous is needed? Yes _No D Fertilizer is swept from all hard surfaces (driveway, sidewalks and streets) following application If fertilizer is used, tell us the number on your bag. (e.g., 10-0-10): _-_-_ 10. Describe the use of herbicides/ insecticides on your site. (Check all that apply) D No herbicides/insecticides are used D Natural/alternative methods of control are used D Herbicides are used to spot-treat non-desirable plants D Insecticides are used to spot-treat pests D Herbicides/insecticides are kept from all hard surfaces during application D Herbicides are applied site-wide o Insecticides are applied site-wide List chemicals or brands used: 11. Check all ofthe ways you manage runoff from your site. Runoff is excess water that washes the grass clippings, ieaves, fertilizer and other poilutants from lawns, sidewalks, and driveways into our lakes and wetlands. o Reduced the amount of hard surfaces. How? o Use rain barrels o Created a rain garden o Created a detention pond o Direct downspouts onto the lawn o Aerate the lawn o The building has a green roof (e.g., sod or prairie grasses) 12. Do you have a steep slope on your site? o No o Yes. Does your landscape design help reduce runoff (e.g., swale at base, deep rooted native plants on slope)? Explain: 13. Does your site border water? o No (If no, go to question 15) DYes 14. Indicate the length and condition of your shoreland site. Total shoreline feet o A natural buffer of native species between the water and turf o A weedy buffer consisting of invasive species (e.g., reed canary grass) o Turf all the way to the water o Rip-rap or rock used to control erosion along the shore o Sand beach to the water 15. Please list as many plants as you can that grow on your site. (Photos and attachments are welcome.) 16. Approximately what percentage of the plants used in your landscaping/ project are native? Landscaping with native plants improves our iocal ecosystem. Native plants are adapted to our environment and climate and are tolerant of both drought (means no need for excessive watering) and tough winters. They are adapted to our soils and, thus, don't need fertilizers or insecticides. This means less maintenance for you. And, because native piants have deeper root systems, they accommodate water infiltration which, in turn, reduces runoff. Finaily, native plants also provide habitat for wildlife. Percent that are native Don't know 17. How much, if any, lawn have you removed and replaced with other types of plantings? Please describe. 18. Do you have any existing natural habitats that you are protecting or enhancing? Please explain. 19. What invasive non-native plants have you removed from your site? Invasive non-native plants crowd out and destroy beneficial native plants. Even a few plants on private property can set seed and these seeds may travel to public open spaces and natural areas. D Buckthorn D Amur maple D Siberian/Chinese elm D Honeysuckle D Slack locust D Russian olive D Spotted knapweed D Crown vetch D Canada thistle D Purple loosestrife D Birdsfoot trefoil D Reed canary grass D Other What control technique did you use? 20. What wildlife species visit your site? 21. What benefits are you seeing as a result of your land stewardship practices? Send your completed application form and site photos to: Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District c/o Land Stewardship Program 2665 Noel Drive Little Canada, MN 55117 Thank you for your efforts in filling out this application! Reqular CDRB meetinq dates for November and December 2006 and 2007 2006 Tuesday, November 14, 2006 Tuesday, November28,2006 Tuesday, December 12, 2006 -Tuesday, December 26, 2006? (day after Christmas - do we need to reschedule or move a day later?) 2007 Tuesday, January 9, 2007 Tuesday, January 23, 2007 Tuesday, February 13, 2007 Tuesday, February 27,2007 Tuesday, March 13, 2007 (Lisa will not be present at this meeting) Tuesday, March 27, 2007 Tuesday, April 10, 2007 Tuesday, April 24, 2007 Tuesday, May 8, 2007 Tuesday May 22, 2007 Tuesday, June 12, 2007 Tuesday, June 26, 2007 Tuesday, July 10, 2007 Tuesday, July 24, 2007 Tuesday, August 14,2007 Tuesday, August 28, 2007 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 Tuesday, September 25, 2007 Tuesday, October 9,2007 Tuesday, October 23, 2007 Tuesday, November 13, 2007 Tuesday, November 27,2007 Tuesday, December 11, 2007 --Tuesday, December 25, 2007 is a holiday- reschedule to Wednesday, December 26, 20077 P:/comdevpUCDRB minutes 2006/Regular CDRB meeting dates for 2006-2007