Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/09/1999BOOK AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD March 9, 1999 6:00 P.M. City Council Chambers Maplewood City Hall 1830 East County Road B 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes - January 12, 1999 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Unfinished Business 6. Design Review a. Building Additions - Carver Elementary School, 2680 Upper Afton Road b. Lighting Ordinance Review c. Election of 1999 Chairperson and Vice Chairperson d. 1998 Annual Report 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Board Presentations 9. Staff Presentations a. CDRB Member Volunteer Needed for the March 22 and April 12 Council Meetings. 10. Adjourn p:com-dvpt~cdrb, agd WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD This outline has been prepared to explain the review process of this meeting. The review of an item usually follows this format. 1. The chairperson of the meeting will announce the item to be reviewed. The chairperson will ask the applicant or developer of the project up to the podium to respond to the staff's recommendation regarding the proposal. The Community Design Review Board will then discuss the proposed project with the applicant. The chairperson will then ask the audience if there is anyone present who wishes to comment on the proposal. After everyone is the audience wishing to speak has given his or her comments, the chairperson will close the public discussion portion of the meeting. 5. The Board will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. 6. The Board will then make its recommendations or decision. Most decisions by the Board are final, unless appealed to the City Council. You must notify the City staff in writing within 15 days to register an appeal. jw\forms\cdrb.agd Revised: 11~09-94 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA JANUARY 12, 1999 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Erickson called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL Marvin Erickson Present Marie Robinson Present Ananth Shankar Absent Tim Johnson Present Matt Ledvina Present III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. December 22, 1998 Boardmember Robinson moved approval of the minutes of December 22, 1998, as submitted. Boardmember Erickson seconded. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ayes--Erickson, Robinson Abstain--Johnson, Ledvina Boardmember Johnson moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Boardmember Ledvina seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. VI. DESIGN REVIEW A. Building Additions--Maplewood Auto Service, 743 Century Avenue North Ray Muckala, the owner of the building, had no problem with the staff recommendations. Secretary Tom Ekstrand distributed copies of a letter from Mr. Muckala that addressed one of the items that pertained to clean up in the back fenced area. Mr. Muckala was not aware that some demolition debris from the A & W drive-in next door, that was laying near his dumpster, could be seen from the neighbor behind. He said it was removed as soon as he was notified. Mr. Muckala showed colored photos of the existing building. His intention was to replace the yellow stripe with white tape and to redo the fascia so the reds match. A sign sizing will be used over the vinyl and then this will be painted. The squares on the garage doors will remain Community Design Review Board Minutes of 01-12-99 -2- red. Mr. Muckala said it would cost thousands of dollars to change the color on these doors. The window frames and trim on the additions will be the same bronze as on the existing building. Boardmember Robinson said their concern was to have the building look uniform in style and color, not like an "obtruse building that is being added and added." Harry Garrish, the architect, said additional HVAC equipment will be added on the existing roof. Mr. Muckala said the south side of the building is a totally separate corporation and the colors would not necessarily be tied in with a future change in oil company ownership. Mr. Garrish said that 95 percent of the retail fuel outlets are red, white, and blue. He felt it was incumbent on the owner of a facility, from a marketing standpoint, to create a harmonious exterior. Chairperson Erickson asked of there was anyone who had questions or comments. No one in the audience responded. He closed the item for comment from the public. Boardmember Ledvina moved the Community Design Review Board: Bo Approve the plans and building elevations date-stamped November 23, 1998 for two second-story additions on the Maplewood Auto Service building at 743 N. Century Avenue. The property owner shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit, the property owner shall submit a uniform building- color scheme for approval by the community design review board. The property owner shall not pave the graveled westerly parking lot unless first submitting a fully-developed grading, drainage, paving and striping plan for the city's approval. 4. Before getting a building permit, the property owner shall remove all debris, parts and old tires from the site. 5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 200% of the cost of the unfinished work. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Screen any new roof-top mechanical equipment that may be added from view of any adjacent residential properties. Any new roof-top equipment that could be seen from nonresidential areas shall be painted to match the building fascia color. Staff shall review any screening proposal. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 01-12-99 -3- Boardmember Robinson seconded. Ayes~ all The motion passed. B. Acorn Mini-Storage Facility--Highway 61 on the old MapleLeaf Drive-in Theater Site. Ellis Gottlieb, of the Nationwide Group, presented this proposal. The review board discussed the following issues with Mr. Gottlieb: building colors, the screening fence for the outdoor storage area, the location of outdoor storage area, landscaping and site lighting. Boardmember Ledvina, who is also a Maplewood planning commissioner, spoke about the planning commission's concerns in regard to the need for a durable fence around the outdoor storage area and the possible need for further study into the current rules and regulations for site lighting. Staff was directed to study the lighting ordinance. Boardmember Robinson moved the Community Design Review Board: Approve the site plan date-stamped November 25, 1998, the landscape plan date- stamped January 12, 1999, the building elevations date-stamped December 2, 1998 and the site lighting and civil drawings date-stamped December 2, 1998 for the Acorn Mini- Storage Facility on the west side of Highway 61 on the old MapleLeaf Drive-in Theater site, based on the findings required by the code. The property owner shall: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Provide the following for staff approval before the city issues a building permit: A grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan to the city engineer for approval. The erosion control plan shall comply with ordinance requirements. The existing cast-iron sanitary sewer pipe, which served the old house on the property, shall be severed and terminated at the street right-of-way. b. A tree survey identifying quality trees on the site that are eight inches or more in caliper. Staff may require additional trees for code compliance. c. A building-color scheme consisting of neutral colors. d. A fence design plan for the screening fence around the outdoor storage area. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Restore and seed or sod any and all disturbed ground such as the areas of blacktop removal and the future building pads for Buildings C and D. Remove all old driveway entrances and restore with sod. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 01-12-99 -4- c. Install a handicap-parking sign for the handicap-parking space. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from adjacent residential properties. Such equipment visible on non-residential sides must be painted to match the building. eo Construct a trash dumpster enclosure if there will be any outdoor storage of refuse. The enclosures must match the building in color and materials. There must be a closeable gate that is 100% opaque. Install an in-ground sprinkler system for all lawn areas on the front and sides of Building A. g. Provide site-security lighting that is directed or shielded so not to cause any lighting nuisance for adjacent property owners or drivers. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The city receives cash escrow for the required work. The amount shall be 200 percent of the cost of the unfinished work. Any unfinished landscaping shall be completed by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spring or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. 5. Comply with any requirements of MnDot for access to the frontage road. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 7. There shall not be any outdoor storage permitted in the area designated for Building D. Boardmember Ledvina seconded. Ayes --all The motion passed. Bituminous Curbing Variance--Just for Feet, 3090 Southlawn Drive John Johannson, of Welsh Companies, discussed his request with the review board for a variance to be allowed to continue using bituminous curbing in two areas north of the Just for Feet store. Staff discussed the recommendation to deny the variance, but instead recommended amending the curbing ordinance to permit bituminous curbing temporarily VII. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 01-12-99 -5- under certain circumstances. Staff explained that there is no basis for approving a variance under the requirements of the state statute. The proposed ordinance would allow the use of bituminous curbing for three years when there would be a future construction phase that would occur. The bituminous curbing could be used for up to three years to allow for the next phase of construction, or, if not, it would have to be replaced with concrete curbing. Mr. Johannson agreed with staff's recommendation and felt that he would be beginning his last phase of development within the three-year deadline. The board discussed whether it would be advisable to require a developer to provide escrow to guarantee the replacement of bituminous curbing after three years. Staff said this is a good idea. Mr. Johannson concurred and stated that the city is holding escrow from him for this purpose. Boardmember Ledvina moved the Community Design Review Board recommend denial of the variance based on the reasons stated in the staff report and also recommended approval of the code amendment with the additional requirement that a developer submit escrow if they are to use bituminous curbing on a temporary basis. Boardmember Johnson seconded. Ayes-- all The motion passed. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS There were no board presentations. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS A. CDRB Member for January 25 Council Meeting: The review board suggested that staff contact Boardmember Shankar to see if he is available to attend. CDRB Member for February 8 Council Meeting: Boardmember Johnson B. Staff reported that the city council reappointed Boardmembers Erickson, Johnson and Ledvina to new two-year terms on January 11, 1999 X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Associate Planner Design Review - Carver Elementary School Additions 2680 Upper Afton Road February 26, 1999 INTRODUCTION Mark Hayes, of Armstrong, Torseth, Skold & Rydeen, Inc., is requesting site and building- design approval to build two small building additions and one concrete dock platform at Carver Elementary School, 2680 Upper Afton Road. This project consists of: 1. A 900-square-foot storage-room addition on the south (rear) side of the building. 2. A 64-square-foot folding-door enclosure on the south side of the building. This "door pocket" would provide an eight- by eight-foot space to store a folding door in the gym. A 10- by 19-foot non-enclosed loading-dock platform with steel guardrails on the east side of the building. This dock platform would be constructed of poured concrete as an extension to the existing concrete steps on the east side. The proposed additions would have exteriors of brown and beige face brick plus EIFS (Exterior Insulation Finish System) to match the existing building. There would be horizontal accent bands also to match the existing building. Refer to the plans and the maps on pages 3-5. DISCUSSION Staff sees no problem with these plans. The proposed changes are minor and would blend in with the existing building to be virtually unnoticeable. RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans stamped February 19, 1999 for the construction of a 900-square-foot storage-room addition, a 64-square-foot gymnasium partition-door enclosure and a concrete loading-dock extension at Carver Elementary School, 2680 Upper Afton Road. The property owner shall repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a permit for this project. REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 9.4 acres Existing land use: Carver Elementary School SURROUNDING LAND USES North: A single dwelling across Upper Alton Road South: School property and Ramsey County Open Space West: Carver Elementary School playground East: Alton Road Dental Clinic and Super America PAST ACTIONS December 19, 1994: The city council approved a cooperative agreement with the school district to share in the costs of building a gymnasium addition at Carver Elementary School. March 27, 1995: The city council approved: 1. A conditional use permit to expand the school. 2. The design plans for the addition. 3. A waiver of the rooftop-equipment screening requirement. 4. An underground lawn sprinkler variance. March 25, 1996: The city council reviewed the CUP and decided not to review it again unless a problem develops. May 11, 1998: The city council approved a sign size variance allowing the Maplewood Parks Department to install a "community gymnasium" wall sign on the gym. October 12, 1998: The city council approved a revision to the CUP to allow a new parking lot. PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: S (school) Zoning: F (farm residence district) p:sec1-28/carver2.99 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. 11- by 17-Inch plans date-stamped February 19, 1999 (separate attachments) 5. Full-size plans date-stamped February 19, 1999 (separate attachments) Attachment 1 HUDSON JNv~ES ~ UPPER AFTON RD. IvlAYER IN. CREEK ! LONDIN CT. 2 POND CT, 3 DORLAND IN. DORLAND DR. LOWER LOCATION MAP 3 Attachment 2 UPPERAFTON R.C)~DJ.~ ~ SCHOOL I~_ (~) ~,AI'~ 5 E'~' COg N TY' OPEN .SPACE CARVER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL F IEL STATION ~_._ _. '" ~ '1'- JR CLINIC COMN CENTER LUTHEFLA, N CHURCH OF PEACE PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP 4 C N Attachment 3 ii!;.; PROPOSED DOCK~! PLATFORM ] CARVER ELEMENTARY ' I 1!, SCHOOL / I-'~ GYMNASIUM ~___[] ~ PROPOSED GYM-DOOR ENCLOSURE PROPOSED STORAGE ROOM ADDITION SITE PLAN · - MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Code Amendment - Site Lighting February 18, 1999 INTRODUCTION On January 12, 1999, the community design review board directed staff to study the city's lighting requirements because of concerns raised while reviewing the proposed Acorn Mini Storage Facility on Highway 61. The issues raised were about protecting abutting homes from light glare and the noticeability of the light source of certain commercial lighting fixtures in use. EXISTING SITE-LIGHTING REQUIREMENT Section 36-(c)(1) states that "the developer of any project, other than single or double dwellings, shall do the following: Install parking lot lighting. Lighting shall not be directly visible from any residential area or public street. Lighting shall not exceed one footcandle at a residential property line. Residential areas are areas planned or used for residential purposes." DISCUSSION Maplewood's regulations address the main points of site lighting and nuisance control. For example, we require that parking lots be lighted, that the "lighting not be directly visible" and that there be a maximum-allowed light intensity of one footcandle at a residential lot line. These cities regulate lighting as follows: City Reo_uire Lighting Plan Footcandle Maximum at Residential Lot Line Rec!uire Concealment of Light Source by Fixture Maple Grove no 1.0 yes Oakdale no .5 yes Plymouth yes .5 yes Roseville no .5 yes White Bear Lake no .4 yes Woodbury no .4 yes Eagan yes none yes Problems With the Present Code Concealing the Light Source Our code could be strengthened to explicitly require that the light source not be visible. We presently say "lighting shall not be directly visible from any residential area or public street." This shows our code's intent to conceal the light source (the bulb), but is vague. The term "lighting" in Maplewood's code could be interpreted to only mean the light bulb and not include the lens. Light-disbursing lenses over a bulb can be quite bright and glare as much as the bulb. Staff recommends revising our code to require concealment of the light source including the lens. This would prevent lens styles that drop below the fixture like the new under-canopy lights at the Oasis Market, County Road B and White Bear Avenue. This lighting method complies with code but some feel that it is too bright. Light Intensity Another problem with the Maplewood ordinance is that we require a maximum of one footcandle of light intensity at a residential lot line. Most of the cities surveyed allow .5 (one-half) footcandles and some .4 footcandles. As an example of how bright a .5 footcandle of light intensity is, I once used a light meter to check a complaint about the lights at Northern Hydraulics at Cope Avenue and Atlantic Street. I found that the footcandle reading at the residential lot lines one block to the south was unreadable-it did not even register on the light meter. The light meter read .5 footcandle, however, at the Northern Hydraulics front lot line along Cope Avenue. In this instance, the problem was not the degree of light intensity, but more so, the fact that a certain light bulb on the site was visible from the complainant's house. Woodbury requires bulb concealment by requiring a lighting-fixture that has a down-light design like the "shoe-box" design fixture often used. This fixture does a good job of hiding a bulb and lens. They also require that lights on the under-side of fuel station canopies have a lens that is flush with the bottom of the canopy. Lightinq Plan Some of the cities I surveyed require the submittal of a lighting plan. We could require a lighting plan at the time of architectural plan submittal, but we often receive such a plan without requesting one. Staff has no strong feeling one way or another in receiving a lighting plan unless the site abuts residential property. Proposed Revisions 1. Reduce the permitted light "spill over" to .4 footcandles at a residential lot line to lessen the impact on neighbors; 2. Require the concealment of the light source including the lens, and; 3. Require a lighting plan when the proposed site abuts residential property. COMMITTEE ACTION February 17, 1999: The planning commission recommended approval. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the code amendment on page 3. family and nonresidential site lighting. p:orcNighting.ord Attachment: Code Change This amendment changes the requirements for multi- Attachment 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SITE-LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTI-FAMILY AND NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: Section 1. This amendment changes Section 36-28(C)(1) as follows (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): (c) The developer of any project, other than single or double dwellings, shall do the following: (1) Install exterior site ~ lighting. The light source, including the lens covedng the b L;.~,~,;[ ............ '- " · '- -' -" -'-='-'- from any residential area or ulb. shall be concealed public street. Lighting shall not exceed {t ,4 erie footcandle of light intensity at a residential property line. Residential areas are areas planned or used for residential purposes. A site- lightina plan shall be submitted for all development applications that abut residential properties. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on ,1999. Attest: Mayor City Clerk Ayes - Nays - 3 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Community Design Review Board Election of Officers for 1999 January 29, 1999 INTRODUCTION City code requires that the community design review board elect a chairperson and vice-chairperson each year. The current chairperson is Mary Erickson. The vice-chairperson is Marie Robinson. RECOMMENDATION Elect a chairperson and vice-chairperson. p:com_dvpt\cdrbelec.sav(6.2) MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Ci~ Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associa~ Planner 1998 Community DesignReview Board Annual Repo~ Janua~ 29,1999 INTRODUCTION The city code requires that the community design review board (CDRB) prepare an annual report for the city council. I have attached the 1998 annual report for review. RECOMMENDATION Approve the community design review board's 1998 annual report. p:\misscelt~cdrbann, rep (6.2) Attachment: 1998 Community Design Review Board Annual Report MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Mary Erickson, Chairman 1998 Community Design Review Board Annual Report January 29, 1999 INTRODUCTION In 1998, the community design review board (CDRB) reviewed 35 items: New Development Proposals 14 Expansions and Remodeling 9 Sign Reviews 5 Code Changes 0 Variances 1 Miscellaneous --6 Total 35 This table compares the number of items reviewed in the last five years from 1993-1997: Year Number of Items Reviewed 1993 49 1994 54 1995 57 1996 31 1997 53 ATTENDANCE Board Member Meetings Attended (of 14) Marv Edckson 13 Marie Robinson 12 Ananth Shankar 13 Tim Johnson 10 Matt Ledvina 11 DISCUSSION In 1998, there was a drop from the previous year in the number of development proposals submitted for review, however, the number of reviews were up from 1996. Last year was a time for controversy with proposals such as the Bulk-Storage warehouse addition on Lakewood Drive south of the railroad tracks, the Delavari Convenience Store/Fuel Station on the comer of Highway 61 and County Road C, four cellular-telephone monopoles and two highly-controversial Ramsey County proposals---the Battle Creek Aquatic Facility and the recently-approved Family Service Center. Each of these items stirred considerable neighborhood concern and objection. Other development proposals included the new Metcalf/Mayflower building, Maplewood Eye Care Clinic on 11th Avenue, Cardinal Pointe Seniors Housing, Gervais CouYt Seniors Housing and new office buildings for Tony Sampair of Remax Realty and an office building east of Dr. Padseau's 11th Avenue dental office. Joe's Crab Shack, a seafood restaurant west of the Olive Garden was approved but later dropped by the applicant as a non-viable project. The CDRB has directed staff to investigate changes in the site-lighting requirements for discussion in a forthcoming meeting. The board wants to look into whether the city's lighting requirements are still appropriate or if revisions are warranted. The board is dedicated to promoting attractive development in Maplewood and will continue to require quality building designs in 1999. p:\misscel~cdrbann.rep (6.2) 2