Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/31/1998BOOK AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD March 31, 1998 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 - March 10, 1997 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Unfinished Business 6. Design Review a. Plaza 3000 Building Facade and Sign Criteria Changes, 3000 White Bear Avenue - Richard Schreier b. Best Buy Building Addition, 1885 E. County Road D, Best Buy Company 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Board Presentations 9. Staff Presentations 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~..drb.agd Revised: 11-09-94 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MARCH '10, 1998 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Erickson called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Marvin Erickson Present Marie Robinson Absent Ananth Shankar Present Tim Johnson Present Matt Ledvina Present III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 10, 1998 IV. VI. Boardmember Ledvina moved approval of the minutes of February 10, 1998, as submitted. Boardmember Johnson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boardmember Johnson moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Boardmember Shankar seconded. Ayesmall The motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. DESIGN REVIEW A. Delavari Convenience Store, NW Corner Highway 61 and County Road C---Ali Delavari Alan Kretman, of HKS Associates, was present representing the applicant. Mr. Kretman had reviewed the recommendations and questioned the requirement for construction of a fence on the west side of the outlot. He thought it would be a more effective screen to place the fence on the common lot line between the applicant's property and the lot to the east. Mr. Kretman summarized changes that have been made in the plans. Mr. Kretman thought it would be most feasible to have parking in front of the convenience store signed for cars only. Ben Taheri, the architect for the project, said they plan to build a six- to eight- inch platform for the cashier to have a clear view over these cars. Mr. Kretman felt it would be more appropriate to place the handicap parking space on the west end of the parking area in front of the convenience store instead of in a direct line with the pumps. Chairperson Erickson said it was more important to have the handicap parking closer to the Community Design Review Board Minutes of 03-10-98 -2- door. Secretary Tom Ekstrand said that staff's interpretation of the code is that no parking should be allowed between the pumps and the attendant's window. Chairperson Erickson suggested a requirement to maintain the sight line between the pumps and the attendant and then leave it up to the applicant to determine how this would be accomplished. Secretary Ekstrand said his recommendation for a fence near the street on the 40-foot strip was an attempt to avoid disturbance of the trees near the neighbors. Mr. Kretman said the intent was to leave the existing trees along this strip and supplement these with thicker plant material. Mr. Taheri said they are looking at flat lenses for lights under the canopy that will diminish light reflection. Mr. Kretman added that a photometric plan will be submitted. He expected that the speakers would be located on the east canopy supports and would face westward. Because of the small number of pumps, Mr. Taheri said they were looking at the option of 100 percent digital communication. Mr. Taheri described the color of the neon being used on the building as "dark as possible and as Iow intensity as possible." A compromise was suggested and agreeable to leave the neon lights on the front and on the west side of the building. Boardmember Ledvina moved the Community Design Review Board recommend: C. Approval of a parking-space reduction to allow nine parking spaces (six fewer than the code requires). Approval is because: 1. Most of the customers that would be in the store are fuel customers who would leave their cars at the pump islands. 2. There is room to add parking spaces along the west side of the site if more are needed. 3. The applicant shall maintain sight lines to the pumps by signage and parking space configuration acceptable to staff. The city council may require additional parking spaces in the future if a parking shortage develops. This may require a setback variance from the city council. Do Approval of the site, grading/drainage and landscape plans date-stamped February 13, 1998 and the building elevations date-stamped December 22, 1997, for the proposed convenience store, car wash and fuel station at the northeast corner of Highway 61 and County Road C. The 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. Submit the following for staff approval before the city issues a building permit: a. Grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans. A skimmer device shall be included on the outlet of the sedimentation pond. b. A revised site plan showing: Community Design Review Board Minutes of 03-10-98 -3- Co do so (1) A handicap-parking space that is eight feet wide with an adjacent eight-foot- wide loading space. (2) Elimination of two parking spaces in front .of the attendants' window. This area shall be cross-hatched and marked for no parking. (3) An in-ground lawn irrigation system. A revised landscape plan showing: (1) The preservation of the trees on the 40-foot-wide strip east of the frontage road. (2) A ~00-foot-long, six-foot-tall decorative wOod screening fence on the east side of this strip. The decorative side shall face the east. The applicant shall attempt to maintain the existing tree growth. A detailed lighting plan showing site lights that are aimed away from the nearby residents or properly shielded from the residents so there is no light-glare nuisance. A plan showing the screening of roof-top mechanical equipment from the homes to the east and west if the roof design does not provide adequate screening. Loudspeakers, if used, shall be located on the east side of the canopy columns and be directed toward the west. g. Neon lighting should be allowed on the north and west side of the building only. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. b. Install a handicap-parking sign for the handicap-parking space. c. Paint all rooftop mechanical equipment, stacks and vents to match the uppermost part of the building. Roof-top equipment must be screened from view from the homes to the south and east if the roof design does not provide adequate screening. d. Install and maintain an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas. e. Post "no parking" signs in front of the building in the required pump-viewing area. This area shall also be cross-hatched for no parking. f. Stripe all parking spaces at a width of ten feet, except for the handicap space. The handicap parking space must be eight feet wide with an adjacent eight-foot- wide loading space. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 03-10-98 -4- 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. bo The city receives cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit 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. Equip the car wash with a noise reduction package and keep the southerly door closed while car washing and drying equipment is operating. 6. See that the external speakers do not exceed the noise standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 7° All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Boardmember Shahkar seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. B. Carver School Sign Variance, 2680 Upper Afton Road---City of Maplewood Jake Sedlacek, Maplewood Parks and Recreation Department employee, said the department does support staff's recommendation. He said the primary reason for this request is to have a sign that will allow users of the gymnasium to locate and recognize it easily. Mr. Sedlacek showed an illustration of the sign as currently allowed by ordinance and said it was not practical. He said the plans are to have small lights on the sign and probably turn an existing security light currently on the school, or add a light on the far west, to focus on it. Boardmember Ledvina felt that an identifying sign was needed but questioned whether it was necessary to have an address included. Bruce Anderson, director of Maplewood Parks and Recreation, said the request for the address was made by the school district. Secretary Tom Ekstrand said an address is required on each building. He was not sure if the address numbers are currently on the building. Mr. Sedlacek said there are large letters that say "Carver School" on the old section of the school but nothing with an address. Boardmember Shankar moved the Community Design Review Board recommend adoption of the resolution which approves a 44-square-foot sign size variance for the community gymnasium sign on the Carver Elementary School gymnasium. Approval is based on the following findings: Adhedng to the code would cause the applicant an undue hardship because of the large building setback. Because of this setback a 24-square-foot sign would not be very noticeable or easily read. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 03-10-98 -5- The proposed sign would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance since it would appear modest in size and not overwhelming due to the large wall mass of the gymnasium and because of the large building setback from the street. The proposed 68-square-foot wall sign is preferable to the applicant installing a 32-square- foot ground sign by the street plus a 24-square-foot wall sign on the gym--both of which are allowed by code. Boardmember Ledvina seconded. Ayesmall The motion passed. C. Pariseau Medical Office Building, Eleventh Avenue Greg and Mary Pariseau Greg Pariseau, the applicant, was in agreement with the staff recommendations. The building will be occupied by an ophthalmologist and an optometrist. Mr. Pariseau said diffused lighting will be provided on the east by a wall unit that is aimed down. Boardmember Ledvina questioned whether the drainage could be directed to an existing pond to the east on the townhome site. He also was concerned about the safety of a pond without a fence. Mr. Pariseau responded that the amount of drainage collected would be far less than that of the townhomes. He said they do not expect standing water and that the sandy soils should expedite draining. Any overflow from large rains would be directed to the wetland to the north. Mr. Ledvina felt that these ponds do hold water and require routine maintenance. He thought a culvert, or something similar, should be used to direct the flow into the existing pond. Mr. Pariseau said he only considered handling the drainage on his own site. Secretary Tom Ekstrand felt this was an appropriate way to proceed. Mr. Pariseau described an erosion plan that included rip-rap (stones and rock) to slow the water as it leaves the parking area and directs the drainage through a gradually-sloped grassy channel to the pond. Mr. Pariseau described the materials being used on the building. Boardmember Ledvina felt the brick, shown on the front, should be wrapped on the east and west sides. Mr. Pariseau admitted that he could see the point of this but he felt the building would be somewhat screened by the townhomes to the east. Mr. Pariseau didn't foresee a big problem with adding this brick if it were required. Boardmember Ledvina moved the Community Design Review Board approve the plans (stamped February 11, 1998) for a medical office building east of 1975 11th Avenue for Greg and Mary Pariseau. Approval is based on the findings required by the code. The applicant shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Provide the following before the city issues a building permit: a. A grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan to the city engineer for approval. The applicant shall submit calculations to the city engineer for surface water control. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 03-10-98 -6- b. A certificate of survey. A revised landscaping plan showing additional trees between the parking lot and street, foundation plantings and six-foot trees for the staggered screening on the east side of the site. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Install a reflectorized stop sign at the exit and a handicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space. b. Stripe the parking spaces to meet these minimum requirements: nine feet wide for employees and nine and a half feet wide for visitors. c. Provide'continuous concrete curbing around the driveway and parking lot. d. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure for any outside trash containers that may be used. The .design and placement of an enclosure shall be subject to staff approval. e. Install an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas. f. Sod all green areas forward of the back wall of the building. The boulevard must also be sodded. The area behind the building may be sod or seed. Submit the site and building plans to the community design review board for the future addition. 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. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit 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. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The brick face, shown on the south elevation, shall be continued on the east and west elevations of the building. Boardmember Shankar seconded. The motion passed. Ayes--all Louis Kamrath, 2499 Ariel Street North, said his property runs on the west of the wetland area which is north of this site. He maintains that runoff is causing a large amount of erosion on his Community Design Review Board Minutes of 03-10-98 -7- property. Mr. Pariseau stated he would do additional grading to supplement that which was done at the town houses to the east. He said that the water runoff area they are building will collect the water and allow it to percolate rather than run to the back of this area. Plantings that are propos, ed to be used in this area will be shown in the erosion control plan. Mr, Pariseau said that the Ramsey Washington Watershed Board is requesting a design for this area that would disperse any overflow water from the pond wide enough that it would not be concentrated and create a problem for the property to the north. Chairperson Ericks~n felt the collected water should either stay and go into the soil or be property drained to a storm sewergMr. Kamrath's property should not be used for drainage from this site. Secretary Ekstrand suggested that Mr. Kamrath call the Maplewood city engineer directly to express his concerns about this issue. Mr. Kamrath also requested a fence along the back of this project. Mr. Ekstrand said the code does not require a fence here. Boardmember Ledvina moved the Community Design Review Board have the Maplewood city engineer review and approve the erosion control plan for the proposed medical office building at 1975 11th Avenue for Greg and Mary Pariseau as it relates to drainage and sediment impacts for property which is located to the north. Boardmember Shankar seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. D. Monopole Proposal, Western Hills Park--American Portable Telecom, Inc. (APT) Gary Van Cleve, counsel for APT of Minneapolis, was present at the meeting along with Daryl Stone, the real estate manager for APT. Secretary Tom Ekstrand said staff didn't take a position on this issue. Staff simply presented the case and recommended that the city council direct staff to prepare a resolution if so desired. Mr. Ekstrand said the planning commission recommended denial of this request and suggested that the city council reconsider the Mn/DOT site on McMenemy Street. Chairperson Erickson also had a problem with the site and questioned whether the board should address the issue at this point. Mr. Van Cleve said that basically the choice for location of the tower in this area was between the Mn/DOT site and this park. Boardmember Ledvina mentioned that the denial of the Mn/DOT site related to the potential rezoning of that site. The city council did not take action on the rezoning which allows APT to reconsider that site. Boardmember Shankar moved the Community Design Review Board recommend acceptance of the staff recommendation to direct city staff to prepare the necessary resolutions for the city council's preference for this request. Boardmember Johnson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 03-10-98 VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS -8- February 23, 1998 City Council Meeting: Chairperson Erickson reported on this meeting. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS A.March 30 Council Meeting: Mr. Shankar will attend this meeting. April 13 Council Meeting: Mr. Ledvina will attend this meeting. B. Secretary Ekstrand' reminded the board that'the next CDRB meeting will be March 31, 1998. X, ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:04 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Building Facade Change and Sign Criteria Revision - Plaza 3000 Shopping Center 3000 White Bear Avenue March 25, 1998 INTRODUCTION Richard Schreier is requesting approval of design plans for the front facade of the Plaza 3000 shopping center at 3000 White Bear Avenue. Refer to the maps on pages 4--5 and the building elevations (separate attachment). The proposed changes are: Cover the front elevation with E.I.F.S. (exterior insulation finish system), a stucco-look material. The front of Petco has already received this treatment. The colors would be the samo medium brown for the cornice near the top of the building and off-white for the remainder. The only part of the front facade not proposed for this treatment are the concrete block areas on both sides of the Petco store front. Remove the signs and put up a metal raceway on which the signs would be fastened. This will eliminate future holes placed in the exterior wall. Damage to the raceway could be corrected then by simply replacing the metal covering. The community design review board (CDRB) should consider amending the sign criteria at this time for the Plaza 3000. Mr. Schreier said that he would be puffing up individual-letter type signs on the proposed raceway, not the continuous cabinet sign now in place. The current sign criteria requires cabinet signs. 3. Add vertical columns on the sides of entry doors also of the same E.I.F.S. material. DISCUSSION The proposed building design changes would give an attractive face lift to the building. The CDRB should amend the sign criteria to allow individual-letter signs on the proposed raceway instead of cabinet signs. Individual-letter type signs are attractive and commonly used. They would give the building an updated look and cause less damage to the building when removed. Mr. Schreier asked if the 30-inch maximum letter height, currently required by the sign criteria, could be increased to 36 inches for the smaller tenants. Staff has no problem with this increase. Staff is also proposing some language changes to simplify the criteria. RECOMMENDATION A. Approve the plans date-stamped March 25, 1998 for the building facade changes at the Plaza 3000 shopping center at 3000 White Bear Avenue. Approve changes to the sign criteria for the Plaza 3000 allowing a conversion from cabinet signs to individual-letter signs mounted on a raceway and increasing the sign's letter height from 30 inches to 36 inches. The amended criteria shall read (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): 1. Tenant signs are restricted to store identity only. The approved signage area on the Plaza 3000 south building is the upper building fascia. The signage shall consist of-a-continuous 36-inch-wide. individual-letter signs mounted on a raceway as shown on the remodeling plans date-stamped March 25, 1998. ~3e-ifleh- ,,,,~ ....... ~,-,y~ o,~ ......... t~ -'--- th~ '- .... ~ ~ ,,f ,L;_ f~c~a. At the center of the mall area, a second row of signs may be used to help locate tenants. There shall be a minimum of 18 inches between signs c~,'~ this sL3n p~,~:. The approved signage area on the Plaza 3000 North Annex is the upper building fascia. The maximum letter height allowed is 36 inches. The total sign height for more than one line of copy shall not exceed four feet. These signs shall be individual, internally-lit letters mounted on raceways. There must be at least two feet between both ends of a tenant's sign and that tenant's store front. These signs must be centered horizontally and vertically within the upper building fascia. Staff may approve signage changes for the ma!or tenants, provided the signs meet the code and are smaller or similar in size to the signs they are replacing, ~ 5. As approved by the city council on October 9, 1995, the sign criteria for pylon signs shall be as follows: The original Plaza 3000 pedestal sign and the 6- by 12-foot pylon sign shall be removed, The proposed 11- by 20-foot pylon, as shown on the plan date-stamped August 1~, 1995. is approved, subject to meeting the city_ code reouirements. The existing Plaza 3000 North Annex pylon sign may remain. If the ShOD_Ding center owner does not install the proposed pylon sign. there shall be no pylon sign changes, except rem0¥al, without city approval. 6. Service door signs are limited to the store name and address. Addresses must be between 3 and 12 inches in height. Store names must not exceed three inches in height. All holes from signs that are removed must be properly patched and the wall, raceway or fascia must be repainted or refinished. The community design review board must review major changes to this criteria. Staff may approve copy changes for the signs ',",stud ir, Cs,'~d=,:",~,; F~r and minor pylon sign revisions if they meet code. p:sec2n~plaz3000.5 Attachments: 1, Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Plans date-stamped March 25, 1998 (separate attachment) 3 Attachment 1' COUNTY BEAR LAKE PI ,M )EuONT II.I u&J~t LAG[ (~(1 ,~ C#IPPlwl NORTH ST. PAUL 2400N. Attachment ""~ JI I I II Il i ~ iiiiiiliiiiilillllllill~ IIIIIIIIIIII !!!!lllllltilll NORTH ANNEX ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '" ' ~;'~______.-- - ~_.__.--'~ ~/OODLYN AVENUE IJlllilllllllllllll 21 LYDIA STREET SITE PLAN N TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Design Review and Setback Variance - Best Buy Addition 1885 E. County Road D March 25, 1998 INTRODUCTION Project Description David Jamieson, of Best Buy Company, is proposing to build an 8,139-square-foot addition onto Best Buy, 1885 E. County Road D. Refer to the maps on pages 7-9. This expansion would go on the east side of the building and extend onto the adjacent parcel previously occupied by Egghead Software. The applicant would remove the vacant Egghead Software building and expand their parking lot onto the site. The building addition would be concrete block and dryvit (a stucco-look material) to match the existing building. The applicant is also proposing a new front facade of dryvit. Refer to the building elevations. Requests The applicant is requesting the following: 1. Approval of building design and site ptans. Approval of a 15-foot setback variance to widen the driveway behind the building. The applicant must either remove the trash compactor from its present location or widen the driveway to 20 feet to comply with the Uniform Fire Code. There is presently only 12 feet of driveway width behind the building next to the compactor. The applicant proposes to widen the drive to 20 feet and provide zero setback from the north lot line using the eight-foot-wide grass strip between the right-of-way fence and the compactor. Refer to the applicant's letter on page 10. DISCUSSION Variance Request-Driveway Setback As mentioned above, the reason for this request is because Best Buy's trash compactor is partially blocking the drive aisle behind the building. The Uniform Fire Code requires 20 feet of drive aisle width and there is presently only 12 feet. There are two options to resolve this matter. One is to require that Best Buy remove the compactor thereby widening the drive aisle. The second is to widen the drive aisle to 20 feet leaving no setback from the right-of-way. The applicant would also have to build a retaining wall due to downward slope towards the lot line. Under state law, to approve a variance, the city council must determine that the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code and also that the variance is needed because there are circumstances unique to the property preventing code compliance. The spirit and intent of the ordinance would be met. The drive aisle would appear to have a substantial setback from the road edge because of the wide freeway boulevard. There is no circumstance, however, that is unique to the property and not created by the applicant that prevents code compliance. The circumstances causing this request are man-mado Best Buy placed the trash compactor in the drive aisle causing the narrow, restricted width. In spite of this, however, it makes sense to permit the widening of the drive to gain proper driveway width. Approving this variance would not negatively impact any neighbor nor the site's appearance as viewed from the freeway. The city has, furthermore, approved parking lot encroachments into state highway and freeway right-of-way for two businesses. One is Vomela Specialty Company at 2354 English Street and the other is Champps Sports Bar at 1734 Adulphus Street. Allowing a zero setback is of lesser consequence than permitting these parking lot encroachments. Building Design and Parking The proposed addition would be attractive and match the existing building. Parking is not an issue since the applicant would provide more than the code would require for this size addition. The property owner, however, should patch all potholes in the Maplewood Town Center parking lot as part of this project. Landscaping The applicant is not proposing any additional landscaping, but is willing to provide some if desired by the city. The applicant would also remove some of the existing amur maple bushes at the southwest corner of the old Egghead Software site by the curb cut. Staff recommends that the applicant provide a landscape plan showing which shrubs would be removed and which ones would be saved. This plan should also show ten 2 % inch caliper trees along the east lot line spaced 30 feet apart. Combined Legal Descriptions The applicant should file a deed combining the Egghead Software site with the Town Center property to form one legally-described lot since they would now be developed as one property. Egghead Pylon Sign The applicant should remove the pylon signs on the Egghead Software site. There is one on the north and one on the south ends of the property. If the applicant wants to keep them, they would have to apply for an amendment to the approved sign criteria for Town Center. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution on pages 11-12 approving the widening of the drive aisle to the right-of-way line north of Best Buy. This would result in a 15-foot driveway setback variance. Approval is based on the following findings: The reduced setback would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance because of the wide boulevard along the south side of 1-694. The drive aisle would continue to have the appearance of a normal setback. Bo 2. The reduced setback would not negatively affect any neighbor. 3. There are no feasible, alternative locations to move the trash compactor that would not conflict with the electrical transformers, exit doors and truck docks. This variance is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall post "no parking" signs behind the building along the curb by this drive aisle and paint a cross-hatch, no-parking pattern on the pavement. Before getting a building permit for the building expansion, the applicant shall either widen the drive aisle adjacent to the trash compactor to 20 feet or provide cash escrow in the amount of 200 percent of the cost of widening the drive aisle, and constructing a retaining wall. The applicant shall submit the plans for this driveway widening and retaining wall construction for staff approval before starting work. Approve the plans date-stamped March 24, 1998, for the proposed Best Buy addition at Maplewood Town Center shopping center. Approval is subject to the applicant complying with the following conditions: 1. Repeating this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Obtaining a setback variance for the drive aisle behind the building. Providing the following for staff approval before getting a building permit: a. A detailed grading plan showing the widening of the drive aisle adjacent to the trash compactor. This plan shall include plans for the retaining wall. bo A landscape plan for the east lot line of the old Egghead Software site showing which shrubs would be removed and which ones would be saved. This plan should also show ten, 2 % inch caliper trees along the east lot line spaced 30 feet apart. Co A design plan for the retaining wall proposed along the east lot line. Widen the drive aisle adjacent to the trash compactor to 20 feet or provide cash escrow in the amount of 200 percent of the cost of widening the drive aisle, and constructing a retaining wall. 4. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: a. Paint any new roof-top mechanical equipment on the addition to match the building. b. Provide all required landscaping. c. Combine the legal descriptions of the Egghead Software property and the Maplewood Town Center property to form one legally-described lot. d. Patch all holes on the Maplewood Town Center shopping center parking lot. 3 e. Install continuous concrete curbing along the edges of all new parking lots and drives. f. Remove the two pylon signs from the old Egghead Software property. g. Post "no parking" signs behind the building along the curb by this drive aisle and paint a cross-hatch, no-parking pattern on the pavement. 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 percent of the cost of the unfinished work. Any unfinished landscaping shall be completed by June 1 if the building is occupied in the 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. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. _ REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 8 acres Existing land use: Maplewood Town Center SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Interstate 694 South: County Road D, Circuit City, Toys-R-Us and Just For Feet West: Slumberland East: Aamco Transmissions PAST ACTIONS August 27, 1986: The community design review board (CDRB) approved the plans for Maplewood Town Center. September 23, 1986: The CDRB approved the sign plan for Maplewood Town Center. March 11, 1991' The city council approved plans for the expansion of Frank's Nursery at Maplewood Town Center. The council also approved a parking reduction for 58 fewer parking spaces at Maplewood Town Center. May 24, 1993: The city council approved plans for Best Buy to build an 8,400-square-foot addition onto the front of their store. The owners of Maplewood Town Center also added additional parking on the west side of Frank's Nursery. The parking lot changes resulted in an increase of the total number of parking spaces to being only 49 spaces short for the entire shopping center. PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: BC (business commercial) Zoning: BC Ordinance Requirement Section 25-70 of the city code requires that the CDRB make the following findingS to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments, and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. 5 That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. Section 36-28(c)(5)(a) requires parking lots to be set back 15 feet from a public right-of-way. Findings for Variance Approval State law requires that the City Council make the following findings to approve a variance from the zoning code: 1. Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship", as used in granting of a variance, means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. p:sec35\bestbuy.adn Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Applicant's Letter of Variance Justification dated March 24, 1998 5. Variance Resolution 6. Plans date-stamped March 24, 1998 (separate attachments) Attachment 1 LOCATION 7 MAP Attachment 2 Attachment 3 ~F SITE PLAN 9 FROM BEST BUY REAL ESTATE Attachment 4 (WED) 3, 25' 98 9'29/ST, 9'29/N0, 3760131977 P 1 Tom Eksrrand City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B Maplewood, MN. 55109 Ma~ch 24, 199~ Tom As Per our phone conversation yest~day. I am s~bmitting to you a IcHor of request for variance due to ~c cxiso, ng condilion h~ rig ~e, ar of the B~:~t Buy Ttg trash compactor at thc roar of our store is or.ly allowing 12' of clear driving space. You have stated that the Fire Marshall has requested the 20' minimum as per cod~. I have ~ied somehow to relocate the compactor to another position on the site. Due tc the existing site conditions (Electrical Traasformo's, Exit door~, and Truck Dock, crc..) thc compactor nexis to ~,_.m.~;,~ in its exislin8 location. By widcuing thc asphalt mca at ~ compactor to :20' clear, this oul¥ leaves a 1' of rear ~etb~ck area bed:ween thc curb anal property line. Since the adj:~:ent property is Int~ s~ate 694 euement space, and this is a variance for 14' of encroachment into the 15' setback area, we reel ius is the best soluaon to an existing problem. David D, ~ Development Mim~g~r Best Buy Co. lac, Corporate Hea~lquarter~: 707,5 Flying Cloui Drive · Eden Prairie, MN 55344 · 612/947-2000 Mailing Adllress: P.O, Box 9312 · IV inneapolis, MN 55440 · NYSE Symbol: BBY 10 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Best Buy Company applied for a variance from the zoning ordinance. WHEREAS, this variance applies to 1885 E. County Road D. The legal description is: Parcel 1: The East 70 feet of the South 693 feet of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 34, Township 30, Range 22, lying Southerly of Highway 694, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota. Parcel 2: Lot 5 except the East 82 feet, Block 1, Tousley Commercial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota. Together with all rights and easements contained in that certain Cross Parking Easement dated June 16, 1986, filed July 28, 1986, as Document No. 2324288, by and between Town Center Partners, a Minnesota generel partnership, and Carla Bicaci and Faize Bicaci, husband and wife, for the purpose of establishing joint driveways and parking area, and as defined to location by Amendment to Cross Parking Easements dated May 20, 1988, filed July 19, 1988 as Document No. 2449851. Parcel 3: Together with all rights and easements contained in that certain Cross Parking Easement dated June 16, 1986, filed July 28, 1986, as Document No. 2324288, by and between Town Center Partners, a Minnesota general partnership, and Carla Bicaci and Faize Bicaci, husband and wife, for the purpose of establishing joint driveways and parking area, and as defined to location by Amendment to Cross Parking Easements dated May 20, 1988, filed July 19, 1988, as Document No. 2449851. WHEREAS, Section 36-28(c)(5)(a) of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requires parking lots to be set back 15 feet from a public right-of-way. WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing a zero setback. WHEREAS, this requires a variance of 15 feet. WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: 1. On council ,19__, the community design review board recommended that the city this setback variance. The city council held a public hearing on ,19.~. City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and community design review board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described variance for the following reasons: The reduced setback would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance because of the wide boulevard along the south side of 1-694. The drive aisle would continue to have the appearance of a normal setback. 2. The reduced setback would not negatively affect any neighbor. 3. There are no feasible, alternative locations to move the trash compactor that would not conflict with the electrical transformers, exit doors and truck docks. This variance is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall post "no parking" signs behind the building along the curb by this drive aisle and paint a cross-hatch, no-parking pattern on the pavement. Before getting a building permit for the building expansion, the applicant shall either widen the drive aisle adjacent to the trash compactor to 20 feet or provide cash escrow in the amount of 200 percent of the cost of widening the drive aisle, and constructing a retaining wall. The applicant shall submit the plans for this driveway widening and retaining wall construction for staff approval before starting work. Adopted on ,1998.