Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/14/2000BOOK AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD March 14, 2000 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: 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Unfinished Business 6. Design Review February 22, 2000 a. Wheeler Lumber Landscape Materials Storage Yard, Southwest Corner of English Street and Gervais Avenue Visitor Presentations Board Presentations Staff Presentations a. CDRB Volunteers Needed for the March 27 and April 10 City 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. o 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~:lrb.agd Revised: 11-09-94 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 22, 2000 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson. Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Matt Ledvina Ananth Shankar Tim Johnson Jon LaCasse Craig Jorgenson Present Present (arrived at 6:01 p.m.) Present Present Present (arrived at 6:01 p.m.) III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of February 8, 2000 Boardmember Johnson moved approval of the minutes of February 8, 2000, as submitted. Boardmember LaCasse seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Secretary Tom Ekstrand said the applicant for Item 6. b. Fresh Paint asked to have it removed from the agenda and postponed until a future date. He also suggested moving 5.b. Annual Report to the end of the meeting. Chairperson Ledvina suggested moving this item to 9.c. under Staff Presentations. Boardmember Johnson moved approval of the agenda, amended to delete 6.b. Fresh Paint and move 5.b. 1999 Annual Report Reconsideration to 9. c. Boardmember LaCasse seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Maplewood Retail Shopping Center, 2271 White Bear Avenue Secretary Tom Ekstrand presented the staff report. He explained that, at the last CDRB meeting on February 8, 2000, the board approved the plans for this project but required that the building color scheme, landscape plan, and comprehensive sign plan be resubmitted for their approval. An issue with the building colors was that they were not shown on the plans. Another reason for tabling was because the board did not like the color variations of the awnings and of the tubular steel details on the building. They felt that it would be a problem with tenant changes--a new tenant may wish to have their own awning colors that differ from the established color scheme. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 02-22-00 -2- One option the community design review board discussed at the last meeting was to display awnings and steel work of the same color. The applicant has presented two alternatives to depict both scenarios. Secretary Ekstrand explained that he does not object to either color scheme. If the board approves the three-color design, staff recommends that the board require that these colors not change. He stated that he discussed this issue with the applicant before the meeting and they agree that the three-color scheme would not change as the tenants change. Mr. Ekstrand discussed the second issue which was with the landscape plan. He was agreeable to the applicant's revised plan. A third issue Mr. Ekstrand presented was the comprehensive sign plan. He discussed the staff proposal for signage and distributed a summary comparing staff's proposed sign plan for this shopping center with the applicant's proposal. Mr. Ekstrand went through the various pads of the sign criteria item by item, including points such as sign placement, sign letter height, sign length and pylon sign height. The board asked questions about the staff report. Chairperson Ledvina was not in favor of the three-color scheme for the building. He preferred one uniform color for the awnings and tubular steel features. Peter Hilger, an architect with Portfolio Design, was present representing the applicant. Mr. Hilger explained their preference for the three-color building scheme and stated that they would not propose to change the colors for specific tenants. The board stated they were okay with the proposed landscaping so they moved to discussion about the comprehensive sign plan. Mr. Hilger was asked to comment on staff's proposed sign criteria for the shopping center. He expressed the developer's need for store identification on the back of the building. Chairperson Ledvina questioned why this was necessary with a large pylon sign on the highway side of the site that would be visible and give the same store names. Mr. Hilger felt that d~;,~ers tend to focus on the building and not on pylon signs. Mr. Ledvina asked for staff's opinion. Mr. Ekstrand said that he shared Mr. Ledvina's concern. A sign on the back of the building would be excessive and redundant with the pylon sign, also readable from the highway. Mr. Hilger explained that they would like approval for the tower signs to be larger and more prominent than the signs on the sign band. Staff was suggesting a maximum sign height of 26 inches for all building-mounted signs. The applicant had proposed tower signs to be 48- inches tall, plus the space between multiple lines of stacked copy. Mr. Hilger requested that the board allow them to place signs on building fascia without being mounted on a raceway. Staff recommended that signs be on a raceway because it minimizes damage to the building. The applicant said they apply signs to the EIFS or stucco because holes are easily patched. Mr. Hilger felt the number of signs proposed were within the sign code regulations. Staff pointed out that the northerly corner store would have five signs by the applicant's current proposal: one on the front, one on the side, one on the back, and one on each of the two pylon signs. Mr. Ekstrand felt this was excessive. He said the requirements for a Community Design Review Board Minutes of 02-22-00 -3- comprehensive sign plan do not intend absolute adhesion to the sign code. The intent is to use the code as somewhat of a basis for review so that the sign plan for a multi-tenant shopping center will be attractive and uniform. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the board was ready to make a motion on these issues. He thought it might be prudent to separate the sign plan from the other two items. Boardmember Shankar moved the Community Design Review Board approve the building color scheme and landscape plan with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with all community design review board conditions from their previous review on February 8, 2000. 2. If the community design review board approves the three-color design, staff recommends that the board require that these colors not change. 3. The landscape plan shall be subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall replace the four ash trees on the south side if they cannot be saved, and replace the two relocated evergreens on the White Bear Avenue side if they do not survive. Tree sizes shall comply with the code. The applicant shall not remove any tree or plant growth on public right-of-way since these trees were shown as plantings on the approved landscape plan. b. The applicant shall resod any disturbed right-of-way. c. The applicant shall install an in-ground lawn irrigation system in all landscaped areas. Boardmember Jorgenson seconded. Ayes--Shankar, Jorgenson, Johnson, LaCasse Nays--Ledvina The motion passed. Chairperson Ledvina explained that he voted against this because he felt the accent colors should be consistent. Boardmember Shankar moved the Community Design Review Board approve the comprehensive sign plan as stipulated in staff's summation with additions by the review board. The sign plan for the Maplewood Retail Shopping Center is as follows: 1. Each tenant can have up to a 36-inch-tall wall sign on their storefront whether or not they occupy a "tower front" space. In addition to a 36-inch-tall sign on the front of the building, tenants in a corner space can have a 36-inch-tall sign on the side elevation. Side elevation signs can only be placed over doors or windows of that tenant's space. 3. Wall signs are not required to be on raceways. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 02-22-00 -4- 4. Signs on the rear building tower are permitted as proposed, but must be confined to the stucco area. These signs shall not exceed 1¼ foot by 14 feet in size. 5. The pylon sign near Highway 36 shall not exceed 36 feet in height as measured from the base of the sign. Boardmember Johnson seconded. Ayes--Shankar, Johnson Nays--Ledvina, Jorgenson, LaCasse The motion failed. Boardmember Shankar moved the Community Design Review Board approve the comprehensive sign plan for the Maplewood Retail Shopping Center as follows: 1. Each tenant can have up to a 36-inch-tall wall sign on their storefront on the main sign fascia area. Tenant signs on the tower shall not exceed 48 inches in height. In addition to a 36-inch tall sign on the front of the building, tenants in a corner space can have a 36-inch-tall sign on the side elevation. Side elevation signs can only be placed over doors, windows or towers of that tenant's space. 3. Wall signs are not required to be on raceways. 4. Tenant identification signs are not allowed on the back of the building. 5. The pylon sign near Highway 36 shall not exceed 36 feet in height as measured from the base of the sign. Boardmember Jorgenson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. VI. DESIGN REVIEW A. Maplewood Fire Station No. 2, Gladstone Neighborhood (Clarence Street) Secretary Tom Ekstrand presented the staff report. Steve Lukin, Assistant Fire Chief for the City of Maplewod, answered the board's questions about the proposal. Boardmember Shankar asked why it wasn't possible to keep the building at its planned location but move the 10 parking stalls to the west to remain in compliance with the Clarence Street right-of-way. Mr. Lukin replied that one of their concerns was keeping the "aesthetic look of it." He said they wanted to save the numerous shrubs on the sub-northerly edge to protect the trail and buffer the area from the neighboring residents. Boardmember Shankar liked the building elevations and was "pleased with the choice of materials." However, he was concerned with the "massiveness" of the south elevation and wondered if some banding could be used across it. The architect for the project said they were trying to bring in an emblem or some kind of wall signage in this area but this was Community Design Review Board Minutes of 02-22-00 -5- dependent on cost. She explained that this is the apparatus bay area that would be used for future expansion. This wall measures apprOximately 80 x 20 feet. Mr. Ekstrand felt more trees were needed on the landscape plan to provide a screen on the south. Boardmember LaCasse moved the Community Design Review Board: Co Adopt the resolution which approves a 15-foot parking lot setback variance for the proposed Maplewood Fire Station No. 2 Gladstone Neighborhood north and northwest of 1347 and 1351 Frost Avenue. This variance would allow a parking lot within the Clarence Street right-of-way. Approval is based on the following findings: Compliance with the setback requirements would cause the applicant undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property. The site is oddly shaped making meeting all parking lot setback requirements difficult. The applicant would meet the spirit and intent of the code by providing handicap- accessible parking spaces closer to the front entrance than if the spaces were moved to a different location. 3. The city has allowed parking in the right-of-way before when the situation warranted it. This variance is subject to the applicant submitting a curbing plan which indicates continuous concrete curbing, concrete edging and parking barriers as shown on the curbing diagram in the staff report. This plan must be submitted to staff for approval before the issuance of a building permit. Do Adopt the resolution which approves a variance from the parking lot curbing requirements for the proposed Maplewood Fire Station No. 2 Gladstone Neighborhood north and northwest of 1347 and 1351 Frost Avenue. This variance would waive the curbing requirement in specific areas on the site. Approval is because sheet drainage from the two larger parking lots is preferred for water quality in this instance. This variance is subject to the applicant submitting a curbing plan which indicates continuous concrete curbing, concrete edging and parking barriers as shown on the curbing diagram in the staff report. This plan must be submitted to staff for approval before the issuance of a building permit. Approve the plans (stamped January 28, 2000) for the proposed Maplewood Fire Station No. 2 Gladstone Neighborhood, based on the findings required by the code. The property owner shall do the following: Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall provide the following for staff approval: a. A grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan. b. A revised landscape plan showing the following: Community Design Review Board Minutes of 02-22-00 -6- (1) Red Maple and Red Oak trees that are at least 2 ~ inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. (2) Amur Maple trees that are at least 1 ¼ inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. (3) A six-foot-tall, 80 percent opaque buffer on the south side of the east parking lot. (4) Areas that will be sodded and those that would have prairie grass. (5) Any additional tree, shrub or turf requirements of the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. (6) In-ground lawn irrigation around the site on the west side of Clarence Street. c. A revised site plan showing the following: (1) The design of the parking barriers. There must be a parking barrier on the south sides of both larger parking lots. (2) A site lighting plan which indicates the fixture designs and illumination intensity. (3) Concrete curbing and concrete edges as shown on the curbing diagram in the staff report. (4) The driveway from Frost Avenue moved to the west five feet to meet the required five-foot side yard setback from the easterly lot corner. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure for any outside trash containers. The enclosure must be 100 percent opaque, match the material of the building and have a closeable gate that extends to the ground. (code requirement) b. Install all landscaping as shown on the approved plan. c. Screen roof-top mechanical equipment that would be visible from the homes along Clarence Street. All other rooftop units that are visible from non residential areas must be painted to match the building. (code requirement) d. Provide handicap-accessible parking spaces and signs as required by the ADA (American's with Disabilities Act). All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Add a brick rollout course along the south elevation to break up the large brick wall. Ayes--all Boardmember Johnson seconded. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 02-22-00 The motion passed. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS VIII. IX. -7- There were no visitor presentations. BOARD PRESENTATIONS February 14 City Council Meeting: Mr. Ledvina reported on this meeting. STAFF PRESENTATIONS A. CDRB Volunteer for February 28 City Council Meeting: Mr. Johnson will attend this meeting. B. CDRB Volunteer for March 13 City Council Meeting: Mr. Shankar will attend this meeting. C. 1999 Annual Report Reconsideration Secretary Tom Ekstrand updated the board on this report. He said it was essentially the same except for the addition of a paragraph that expressed the board's willingness and desire to do whatever needs to be done to address design issues in regard to the undeveloped land west of the Maplewood Mall and also the White Bear Avenue Corridor. Boardmember Shankar moved the Community Design Review Board approve the 1999 Community Design Review Board Annual Report. Ayes--all Boardmember Jorgenson seconded. The motion passed. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Wheeler Lumber Landscape Material Center Southwest Corner of English Street and Gervais Avenue March 7, 2000 INTRODUCTION Project Description Ken Fields, of Wheeler Lumber LLC, is requesting city approval to establish a wholesale landscape material distribution storage facility. He wants to open this facility on the undeveloped property on the southwest corner of English Street and Gervais Avenue, next to the existing telecommunications monopole. Refer to the maps on pages 7-9 and the letter from Mr. Fields on page 10. The applicant is currently located on the Bulk Storage site, 1300 McKnight Road North. However, their lease is expiring so they must move by April 1. Along with outdoor storage of cement pavers, landscape timbers and similar landscaping materials, the applicant would build a two-car garage to store their fork lift and move in a single- wide trailer to use as their office. Both of these buildings would have the same exterior of vertical-groove wood siding. Refer to the drawings on pages 11-12. ' The applicant would surround the site with a six-foot-tall chain link fence. They would provide plastic screening slats in the fence on the east and south sides. They do not propose any screening from the north and west. The north is screened by existing trees and the property to the west is at a higher grade elevation so the applicant does not feel that additional screening would be beneficial. The applicant would pave a three-car parking lot for visitors and their staff. The storage area inside the fence would have a gravel surface. Requests To open this new facility, Mr. Fields is asking the city to approve: 1. A conditional use'permit (CUP) for outdoor storage. 2. The design plans for the site, the buildings and for the screening fence. . BACKGROUND April 14, 1997: The city council approved a CUP for the telecommunications monopole. DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit Staff feels that the council should approve this CUP. It would be compatible with Truck Utilities across the street and should not be offensive to any future or existing neighbors if the applicant properly screens the site. 'Screening Our concern with outdoor storage yards is primarily that the owners keep them screened. The applicant is proposing plastic slats in the chain link fence to screen the storage yard from the Highway 36 view and from their front--the English Street side. Staff is recommending screening slats all the way around, even though the land to the north is undeveloped at this time. Staff has been discussing development requests with the owner of the land to the north and northwest. Development of this land is anticipated, therefore, screening should be provided on the north side as well. The applicant has pointed out that screening from the west would not do much good since the Metcalf site is considerably higher. They feel that a person at the Metcalf building or parking lot would be able to look over the fence into the storage yard. Even though the proposed storage yard would be considerably lower in grade elevation than the Metcalf building, staff suggests screening slats on that side as well. Mr. Metcalf was required to install landscaping on their east side. This applicant should be required to buffer their storage yard as much as possible from the view to the west. Landscaping The applicant has not proposed any landscaping beyond the screening that would be provided by the fence. Staff recommends that they submit a landscape plan for the front grass area along English Street to accent the front of the site. The code requires an in-ground lawn irrigation system for landscape areas. This requirement can be waived if the applicant has an alternative method of watering landscaping. Parking There is no minimum parking code requirement for a wholesale facility like this. The applicant is proposing three parking spaces. This should be adequate since this is not a retail facility. If a parking shortage would develop, the city council can require more parking. Building Design The applicant is proposing wood exteriors on the two buildings. Wood siding is not typically acceptable since it requires maintenance. In this case, however, wood siding would have a softer look than metal or vinyl. Furthermore, since the buildings would be small, they would not be hard to maintain if touch-ups are needed. RECOMMENDATIONS Ao Adopt the resolution on pages 13-14. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for the outdoor storage of landscape materials on the property at the southwest corner of Gervais Avenue and English Street. The city bases approval on the findings required by the code and subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3, The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The city council may require more parking spaces should the need arise. Bo Approve the plans dated January 27, 2000, for the Wheeler Lumber landscape materials storage facility on the southwest corner of English Street and Gervais Avenue, based on the findings required by the code. The property owner or applicant shall: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Submit the following to staff for approval before getting a building permit: a. A grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan. b. A landscape plan for the lawn on the east side of the site. This area shall be sodded and planted with a combination of evergreen trees and deciduous trees and shrubs. 3. Complete the following before getting an occupancy permit: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. The existing trees on the north side of the proposed site must not be removed. c. Provide one van-accessible handicap parking space with loading aisle and handicap- parking sign as the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requires. d. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure if there will be any outdoor storage of refuse. The enclosure must match the building in color and materials and shall have a closeable gate that is 100 percent opaque. e. The six-foot-tall chain link fence must have a top rail and have dark green slats around the entire storage yard. Install an in-ground sprinkler system for all lawn areas on the front (east side) of the site unless the applicant provides an alternate watering method acceptable to staff to keep the plantings watered. go Provide site-security lighting as required by the city code. The light source, including the lens covering the bulb, shall be concealed or shielded so not to cause any nuisance to vehicle drivers or to adjacent property owners. h. The buildings shall have matching exteriors of vertical-groove wood siding and be kept painted or stained in good repair. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: o a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. bo 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. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. CITIZEN COi'.;~ENTS I surveyed the eight surrounding property owners within 350 feet of this property for their comment about this proposal. I received one reply from Leo Capeder of Truck Utilities. Mr. Capeder stated "we have no problems with this proposal." REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 1.4 acres Existing land use: Existing telecommunications monopole and related ground equipment SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: West: East: Undeveloped property across Gervais Avenue Metcalf building parking lot and Highway 36 frontage road A multi-tenant office warehouse building built by Mr. Metcalf Truck Utilities across English Street PLANNING Land Use Plan and Zoning Designations: M-1 (light manufacturing) Ordinance Requirements Section 36-151(b)(4) requires a CUP for the exterior storage, display, sale or distribution of goods or materials. The city may require screening of such uses pursuant to the screening requirements of clause 6(a). Clause 6(a) requires screening of at least 80 percent of the use from the highest topographical point of the nearest residential lot lines. Findings for Approval Section 36-442(a) states that the city council must base approval of a CUP on nine standards for approval. Refer to the resolution on pages 13-14. Section 25-70 of the city code requires that the community design review board 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. 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. 5 Application Date We received this application on February 2, 2000. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal. City council action is required by April 2, 2000. p:sec9\wheeler.2 Affachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Applicant's letter of request dated January 27, 2000 5. Proposed Office Building 6. Proposed Storage Building 7. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 8. Project Information Booklet from Wheeler Lumber, LLC dated January 27, 2000 (separate attachment) PALM CT. BEAM AVE.~; Kohlman BROOKS CT. COUNTY Kl~.~k an AVE.. SEXTANT AVE. 1. SUMMIT CT. 2. ¢OUNTRYVIEY,/ CIR. 3. DULUTH CT. 4. LYDIA ST. BEAM bJ KOHL~T AVE. z bJ Attachment 1 'Eli AVE. (~) [] North Hazelm>o~ Park Z r., · EDGE DEMONT '~ A~VE~'{~~· BROOKS AVE. GERVAIS WmNO z z Ld BURKE C~ ~ JUNCTION O) C.^MB[RS coUgSF" Kc,..L.L¢~' GOL.~' SKILL .._1 FROST COPE ~ ELDR __ BELMONT SKILL IV, AN S."'RRE,,, AVE. 7~_~1 K od Loke AVEo ~ Park John Glenn AVE. ROSEWOOD AVE. LOCATION MAP Attachment 2 M1 ':..' i::. ..-::... .-'": 20 GERVAIS AVENUE I METCALF 4.0~J~.-. (~) 1255 -- HIGHWAY 36' 04 _., I.u 2354 ~'~ '-"~-"-t ....... '~ ,o ,'f "'J .f*"*'~ .,,:~,.~"1 ..... 't .I ~ 2390 (~ I.&4-o.~. TRUCK UTILITIES 2370 ~ [. 4 ~. ~ ) ~'~(zo') VOMELA lTL [ ,. ~.=.. I1: PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP 8 Attachment 3 Gervais Avenue SITE PLAN Wheeler Consolidated, Inc. Attachment 4 11151 Chaparral Avenue P.O, Box 99 Shakopee, M~'hnesota 55379-0099 (612) 496-1043 (800) 831-4891 Fax: (612) 496-3220 TOM EKSTRAND CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 EAST COUNTY ROAD B MAPLEWOOD, MN. 55109 DEAR MR. EKSTRAND & CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, Thursday, January 27, 2000 WHEELER LUM~ER LLC, A NATIONAL COMPANY WITH HEADQUARTERS AND GENERAL OFFICE IN WEST DES MOINES, IOWA, PROPOSES TO USE PART OF THE LEGALY DESCRIBED PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ENGLISH STREET AND GERVAIS AVENUE IN MAPLEWOOD AS SHOWN ON THE EXHIBIT SKETCH HEREWrrH, FOR A WHOLESALE LANDSCAPE MATERIAL DISTRIBUTION AREA, OPERATED AND MANAGED BY OUR LANDSCAPE SUPPLY DIVISION. THE OPERATION WOULD BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE PATIO TOWN SITE ON HIGHWAY 36, WITH ALL MATERIALS KEPT IN A NEAT AND ORDERLY MANNER. WE DISTRIBI, J'I~ ALL TYPES OF RETAINING WALL BLOCK INCLUDING ANCHOR, KEYSTONE, AND INTERLOCK SYSTEMS, NATURAL STONE AND LANDSCAPE TIMBERS AS WELL AS OTHER LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS THAT ARE SOLD DIRECT TO WHOLESALE CONTRACTORS.THERE WILL NEVER BE ANY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORED ON THE SITE. IT IS OUR INTENT TO CONFORM TO THE ESTHETICS OF THE SU1LROUNDING ENVIRONMENT. OUR PLAN IS TO INSTALL A CHAIN-LINK FENCE AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY FOR SECURITY WITH 80% SCREENING ON THE SOUTH & EAST SIDES. WEST SIDE OF PROPERTY HAS A CELLULAR PHONE TOWER WITH FENCE ALREADY IN PLACE. NORTH SIDE OF PROPERY IS ESTABLISHED wrrlt NATIVE VEGATAION, WHICH WILL REMAIN. THE EAST SIDE OF PROPERY WOULD BE OFFICE AND DISPLAY AREA, WHICH SHOULD NOT CONFLICT W1TH BUSINESS TO THE EAST, WHICH HAVE EXISTING OUTSIDE STORAGE ALREADY. WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT THIS FACILITY WOULD HAVE NO NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE BUSINESSES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. rr IS OUR INTENTION TO COMPLY W1TH ANY OTHER REASONABLE REQUIREMENTS THAT MAY BE SET OUT IN THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. THANK YOU. SINCERELY, WHEELER LUMBER LLC. C/C DALE DRAVES JOHN OLAFSON RANDALL SAMUELSON 10 COMMERCIAL STRUCTURS 12197737933 Attachment 5 02/01 '00 12:54 N0.180 02/03 LIJ I I ~ I I A'I.~YflYXOUddY ?-.~L Attachment 6 Design # 43596 ~~[~[~~~:~®'1/26/2ooo ~ '~* Take this sheet to the Building Materials counter t.o purchase your materials. **~ You se. lected a garage with these options: 24' ~de X 24' Deep X 10' High Gable roof w! 5/12 pitch truss construction. 24" gable/24" eave overhangs. 1/2" OSB Roof Sheathing. ~ 25 yr. Superglass, Weatherwood Shingles. Pine Soffit. Pine Fascia. White Aluminum Regular Roof Edge. Pine overhead door jamb. 12" Pine ~ide Grooved Vertical Siding. :ront View lack View PROPOSED STORAGE BUILDING 12 Attachment 7 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Wheeler Lumber, LLC, applied for a conditional use permit for outdoor storage: WHEREAS, this permit applies to property located at the southwest corner of Gervais Avenue and English Street. The legal description is: THE EAST 353 FEET OF BLOCK 24, CLIFTON ADDITION, EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET THEREOF, SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 29, RANGE 22, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On March 6, 2000, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. On March 27, 2000 the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approves this 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. 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 interference or other nuisances. 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. 3.3 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. 'All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The city council may require more parking spaces should the need arise. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,2000. :].4