HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/22/2001BOOK
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
May 22, 2001
6:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
Maplewood City Hall
1830 East County Road B
Call to Order
Roll Call
Approval of Minutes: March 27, 2001
Approval of Agenda
Unfinished Business
The Gardens Townhouses - Masterpiece Homes, McMenemy Street
Design Review
Visitor Presentations
Board Presentations
Staff Presentations
a.
CDRB representation needed for the June 11 city council meeting. (At this
time it appears there is no need for a member to attend the May 29 meeting.)
b. Resolution of Appreciation for Jon LaCasse.
c. New Member Orientation
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.
2. 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.
3. The chairperson will then ask the audience if there is anyone present who wishes
to comment on the proposal.
4. 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.
7. 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
TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 2001
II.
III.
IV.
Vo
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:02.
ROLL CALL
Matt Ledvina
Ananth Shankar
Tim Johnson
Craig Jorgenson
Linda Olson
Staff Present:
Recording Secretary:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 13, 2001:
Present
Present (Arrived at 6:12)
Present
Absent
Present
Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Director of Community Development
Lori Hansen
Board member Johnson moved approval of the minutes of March 13, 2001.
Board member Shankar seconded the motion. Ayes-All
The motion passed.
APPROVALOFAGENDA
Board member Johnson moved approval of the agenda, as submitted.
Board member OIson seconded.
The motion passed.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Ayes-All
Mr. Tom Ekstrand gave the staff report for the city. The applicant for Gander Mountain had
submitted revised architectural plans as the board requested. The examples included in the
boardmembers packets have been revised even further. Also, new landscaping plans were
submitted to staff this evening. Staff is suggesting additional column detailing be added. In a brief
meeting with the applicant, the applicant has stated they are opposed to the columns and feel they
will detract from the mountain detailing on the building.
Gander Mountain Building Elevation Revisions--(North of Bennigan's at Birch Run Station).
Community Design Review Board -2-
Minutes of 03-27-01
Substantial landscaping has been added along the easterly side and southwesterly corner of the
building. The pictures that were recently submitted to staff best display the shrubbery and other
landscaping the applicant is proposing to break up the long expanses of building. Boardmember
OIson asked if the two trees on the west side of the building were transplantable. Staff did
discuss the trees with the landscaper, and, due to the type of tree, ash (which does not transplant
well), and the fact that they are in not that great of shape, they did not feel the trees would survive
transplanting. Instead, the trees would be replaced with new trees.
Mr. Dennis Crowe, with Oppidan Investment Company, was present for Gander Mountain. The
elevation drawings submitted to staff have reflected the building materials that are being proposed
(two-toned split faced block) and show the change in grade that occurs along the west and south
elevations. On the east elevation vertical e~ements have been added. The elements will be of a
brick material that will match the brick banding which will project four inches from the face of the
building. The base will be a grey split-faced block that will project eight inches out from the face of
the wall. This will provide a shadowing and 3-D effect to provide the relief needed. Three
intermediate columns have been added on the east elevation to break up the wall face. A corner
detailing that carries the same detail around the corner has also been added. The trees noted on
the landscaping plan are whitespire birch trees. The shrubs are a combination of burning bush
and spreading junipers to give the wall face a tier effect.
On the west elevation there is a four-foot grade change. The grey base will run along the bottom
up to the first course of brick banding. Two Norwood Red Maple Trees have been added with
shrubs below them to continue the three-dimensional effect. The south elevation has been
adjusted to reflect the grade change that occurs across that side of the building, and a screen wall
has been added to screen the loading dock. The same brick banding and corner detailing will be
applied to the screen. The signage will remain as proposed with all four walls being signed with
no pylon sign insta~ed.
Boardmember Olson felt the plans submitted were a vast improvement over the "big box"
submitted originally.
Boardmember Shankar asked about the height of the entry doors and the color of the flames.
The appJicant responded in saying they were 3' x 7' doors. Mr. Shankar felt in relation to the
whole building, the entry way appears dwarfed. Mr. Shankar questioned if there is a possibility to
recess the entry doors two feet to create a shadowing effect on the north and west elevation. Mr.
Crowe felt it would be difficult to do that without affecting the airlock vestibule. He did feel they
may be able to set it back 12 inches, but is it not a change they would view favorably. Mr. Crowe
also stated the color of the frames was a clear anodized aluminum. The color will not match one
of the three E.F.I.S. colors because, as nice as that may look, it would not be a finish that would
be durable enough to stand the abuse these entry doors take.
Mr. Crowe explained the co~or of the bollards would be dark green, or could be any color the
board feels would be appropriate. The bollards are basically a pipe with a vinyl wrap that is
available in multiple colors. He felt staying in the earth tones would be most appropriate.
The board members felt adding columns at the end of the screen wall would break up the
expansive, highly visible south wall.
Mr. Shankar moved to board to approve the revised architectural plans date-stamped March 27,
2001, for the proposed Gander Mountain store at the Birch Run Station Shopping Center.
Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions:
1. The bollards shall be tan in color.
The entrance door front on the north and west side shall be setback 12 inches from the
base of the E.I.F.S. material.
Community Design Review Board -3-
Minutes of 03-27-01
VI.
The Iow screen wall on the south side shall be terminated with a 4-foot-wide brick.
Compliance with the March 13, 2001 community design review board motion, except as
noted above.
Mr. Johnson seconded.
Ayes-All
Motion carries.
DESIGN REVIEW
A. Mendard's Building Elevation Revisions-(2280 Maplewood Drive).
Mr. Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Director of Community Development, gave the staff report for the
city. In observation by staff and the design board members, the exterior on the new addition that
was approved by the board, was not used. A brick embossed precast panel was the exterior
approved. What was installed was an aggregate finish. Also, five additional feet were added to
the height of the building.
The applicant has submitted plans showing revisions which show a greatly enhanced landscaping
plan on the westerly and northerly faces of the new addition. Since the report was mailed out, the
applicant has informed staff that they have pressure washed the exterior. Staff did have an
opportunity to go look at the exterior yesterday. It did wash off some of the grey and makes the
exterior appear more tan in color. The coloration of the new exterior is now more compatible to
the brick on the existing building. Staff therefore, would like to alter the recommendation to note
the building color as being acceptable. Since the fascia on the front of the building will be a hunter
green, staff is suggesting an accent stripe of the hunter green along the north face of the building.
Mr. Gary Colby, with Menards, was present to answer questions. Mr. Colby displayed photos of
the exterior of the building after it had been pressure washed. He felt the color of the building was
now a very close match to the existing building. The previously approved grey color for the
building flashing will now be a hunter green. Hunter green is now one of Menard's basic colors in
their new corporate color scheme. The green accent stripe, proposed by staff, was reviewed by
Menard's, and they feel it is a good suggestion. Although staff proposed a six-foot-wide stripe to
go behind the sign, Mr. Colby noted they would like to use a narrow stripe below the sign, and run
it along the east, north and west elevations.
The landscape they are now proposing is quite extensive. The original plan submitted had eight
trees along the north facade. They now are proposing to replace the 8 trees with 19 trees and
184 shrubs. It will not be possible to have the landscaping done by the time they would like to
occupy the building, but they are willing to put up an escrow to ensure the completion of the
landscaping in June. The retaining wall block will be a darker color than the color of the addition
to add some contrast to the north end of the building. The retaining wall planters will each be two-
feet in height. It will be a combination of a curved and straight wall and extend all across the north
end of the building. The applicant feels the installation of the retaining wall and landscape will, in
effect, reduce the height of the building.
As boardmember Olson pointed out, and other boardmembers agreed, the accent stripe should
run behind the red text just as it is on the sign above the front door. They felt continuing the
theme around the building would be appropriate.
Mr. Ledvina felt the total planter height should be 5 feet. He felt this would then proportionately
decrease the excessive height appearance of the building.
Community Design Review Board -4-
Minutes of 03-27-01
VII.
VIII.
IX.
Xo
Boardmember OIson moved the board to approve the plans date-stamped March 19, 2001 for the
building design and landscaping changes for the Menard's store addition at 2280 Maplewood
Drive. Approval is subject to the property owner doing the following:
1. Painting all flashing and building fascias hunter green.
Painting or staining a horizontal accent stripe on the west, north and east sides of the
addition. This stripe shall be hunter green to match the fascia and flashing. The width of
this stripe shall be as wide as the Menard's wall sign on the north side of the building
addition. This stripe shall be placed in line with the "Menard's" sign on the north side of
the building.
o
Installing all landscaping on the site by the time of the occupancy of the addition or the
applicant shall provide escrow as required previously by the city council.
o
Installing the two-tiered retaining wall planters with a brown-tone color as a contrast to the
building color and a rock-face front that total a height of 5 feet.
5. Compliance with the October 25, 1999 city council conditions except as stated above.
Mr. Shankar seconded.
Ayes-All
Motion carries.
VISITOR PRESENTATION
No visitor presentations.
BOARD PRESENTATIONS
Mr. Shankar attended the March 26 city council meeting. The Maplewood Imports Addition, the
Auto Zone proposal and the AT & T Monopole proposal were all approved.
STAFF PRESENTATIONS
A community design review board member is needed for the city council meeting on April 23.
Mr. Ledvina will attend this meeting.
Mr. Johnson will be attending the April 9 city council meeting.
Mr. Ekstrand welcomed Linda Olson as the new community design review boardmember.
There will be an orientation for Linda at the April 10 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:12.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
The Gardens
Summer Lane, east of McMenemy Street
May 17, 2001
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Mr. Gordie Howe is proposing to develop 22 townhouses in a development called The Gardens.
It would be on a five-acre site on a private-drive cul-de-sac on the east side of McMenemy
Street, south of Roselawn Avenue. Refer to the maps on pages 16-19. A homeowners'
association would own and maintain the common areas.
Each building would have horizontal-lap vinyl siding, aluminum soffits and fascia and brick
veneer on the fronts. In addition, each unit would have a two-car garage. (See the elevations on
pages 24-27 and the enclosed plans.)
Requests
To build this project, Mr. Howe is requesting several city approvals including:
1. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) for a 22-unit housing
development. In this case, the site would have a mix of two-unit and three-unit owner-
occupied townhome buildings. In addition, having a PUD gives the city and developer a
chance to be more flexible with site design and development details than the standard zoning
requirements would normally allow.
2. A preliminary plat for the townhouse lots and the lots for the common area, ponding areas and
the existing apartment building. (See the map on page 19.)
3. The design plans for the site, landscaping and buildings.
DISCUSSION
Zoning, Land Use and Comprehensive Plans
The city has shown this site for medium density residential development (R-3(M)) on the land use
map (see the map on page 17). Maplewood intends areas designated as R-3M as areas for
townhouses or apartments of up to 6 units per gross acre. Maplewood has zoned this property
R-3 (multiple dwellings). This zoning designation allows a mix of housing types including twin
homes, apartments, condominiums and other types of residential uses.
The proposed development plan is consistent with the density allowed by the comprehensive
plan and with the zoning designation for the property. Specifically, the 22 new units on the 5-acre
site means there would be 4.4 units per gross acre. This proposal would meet the density
standards outlined in the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan for this site. In addition, the proposed
development density would be consistent with the density standards recommended by the
Metropolitan Council for housing in first-ring suburbs. This is a good site for a mix of housing
styles and densities. It is on a collector street (McMenemy Street) and near a major collector
street (Roselawn Avenue), is next to a church and there are two schools nearby.
Conditional Use Permit
The applicant is requesting the CUP for the PUD because the proposed development has a mix
of two and three-unit buildings. This plan has proposed setbacks from the south and east
property lines (30 - 40 feet) that are smaller than the city would usually allow. If the development
had all two-unit buildings, then the proposed plans would meet Maplewood's setback standards.
The code, however, usually requires a 50-foot setback from a residential property line for
buildings with more than two units. Having the PUD gives the city and developer a chance to be
more flexible with site design and development details than the standard zoning requirements
would normally allow.
The developer intends to sell each of the townhouses. As proposed, the 22 dwelling units would
be on about five acres for an overall project density of 5.4 units per acre. For a comparison, the
comprehensive plan allows developments with single dwellings to have up to 4.1 units per gross
acre. As such, on a five-acre site, there could be up to 20 single-family homes.
Front and Rear-Yard Setbacks
As proposed, with the lot sizes, layouts and site topography, the developer has shown a variety
of building locations on the proposed grading plan. Having a variety of setbacks in this
development will allow for less mass grading and more individual town house styles. Specifically,
the developer has shown the buildings with 40-foot and 30-foot setbacks from the south and east
property lines.
Preliminary Plat
The proposed development and preliminary plat with 22 units meets the city's density
requirements for medium-density residential development. Having a lot under each detached
town house unit will allow the developer to sell each unit individually.
Public Utilities
There are sanitary sewer and water in McMenemy Street to serve the proposed development.
However, there is no city storm sewer in this part of Maplewood.
Drainage Concerns
There is no city storm sewer in this part of Maplewood. The grading plan shows the developer
using rain water gardens and the new storm water pond on the north side of Summer Lane within
the proposed development to control the storm water. The applicant's engineer has designed the
site, with the rein water gardens and the new pond, to accommodate all the storm water from
this site from back-to-back 100-year storms.
The developer's engineer told me that by using the proposed ponds as storm water detention
facilities, the development will not increase the rate of storm water runoff from the site. That is, the
runoff leaving the site will be at or below current levels. The city should require that the applicant's
grading/drainage plan ensures the runoff from his project will not increase the storm water flow
onto any neighbor's land. The developer's engineer will need to provide the City Engineer with
information and calculations showing that this project will not increase the amount of storm water
running off of the site.
The existing storm water pond to the south of the site on the north side of Ripley Avenue was
designed and built to accommodate drainage from a large area north of Ripley Avenue, including
this site. However, this pond is privately-owned and not available to take additional storm water
unless the pond owner is willing to accept additional water. The applicant's proposal would
accommodate their drainage needs without using this pond.
Drainage and Watershed District
The Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed Distdct has done a preliminary review of the proposed
project plans. They did not have any major concerns about the proposed plans. It is important to
remember that the applicant or the contractor must get a permit from the watershed district before
starting grading or construction. That is, the watershed district will have to be satisfied that the
developer's plans will meet all watershed district standards.
Tree Removal/Replacement
As proposed, the applicant's contractor would grade most of the property to prepare the site for
construction. The proposed plans show the developer removing six large trees (oak and
basswood). With careful grading and construction, the developer may be able to save the double
oak clump between Lots 2 and 3, the 8-inch oak tree south of Lot 6 and the basswood clump in
front of building 22. The developer would actually remove more than six trees from the site. Other
than these six "quality" trees, the applicant would remove many box elder, cottonwoods and
smaller scrub trees that the city code does not consider "significant." The applicant is proposing to
plant at least 71 trees (including green ash, red maple, linden, white spruce and Austrian Pine)
with his plans.
Trail
I had Bruce Anderson, the Maplewood Parks and Recreation Director, review the revised
development plans. Mr. Anderson noted that the developer is not proposing to build any trails with
the development. He recommends that the developer install a pedestrian and bicycle trail between
Ripley Avenue and Summer Lane. This trail would allow people to travel between the homes on
the two cul-de-sacs without having to go or drive around the block. The trail would have an eight-
foot-wide bituminous surface and should go over the sanitary sewer line in the development
(between buildings 11 and 12). It also could go along the west property line of Lot 11 on the north
side of Ripley Avenue.
For paved off-street paths, Maplewood requires 8-foot-wide bituminous paths centered in a trail
way or easement that is at least 10 feet wider than the trail. As I noted, the location of this trailway
easement would be between Lots 11 and 12. The developer should build a fence on both sides of
the paved trails within this plat. The city should require the developer to install the sidewalks, trails
and fences with the streets and driveways before final plat approval. This is to ensure that the lot
buyers know that the trail is there.
To prevent any confusion about ownership and property rights for trails, the county recommends
that the city have the developer locate the trail in a public right-of-way or within an easement on
the plat. All the trails within the development should be public and for all to use, not just for those
living in the development.
Design Review Discussion
The proposed buildings would be attractive and would fit in with the design of the existing homes
in the area. They would have an exterior of horizontal vinyl siding (sand color) with brick veneer on
the fronts (Bordeaux color) and the roofs would have Heatherwood-colored asphalt shingles. (See
the proposed elevations on pages 24-27 and the enclosed project drawings.) These buildings
would be very similar, if not identical to, the buildings approved by the city in the High Pointe Ridge
development (just south of County Road D). Staff does not have any major concerns about the
proposed plans since this development will be on a private driveway and would be somewhat
isolated. In fact, only the buyers of the townhouses and the residents in the existing apartment
building would be able to see the fronts of the new buildings.
The community design review board has recently noted concerns about "snout-designed" homes.
These are dwellings that have garages as the dominating street-side feature. The proposed
townhomes have this design. The community design review board may want to have the developer
change the proposed designs or add features to the buildings to lessen the impact of the garages.
This could include additional landscaping in front of the dwelling parts of the buildings, adding
covered front porches, enhancing the design of the garage doors or adding decorative light fixtures
next to the garages and entrance doors.
Parking
It should be noted that the city will allow parking along the north side of Summer Lane since it will
be 28 feet wide. There is not room on the site to add off-street parking within this development.
Landscaping
As proposed, the developer would plant 71 trees, numerous shrubs around the buildings and
install rain water gardens on the site. The mix of plantings will vary from unit to unit depending on
whether the unit faces north or east. (See the landscaping plans on pages 22 and 23.)
To enhance the view of the pond from the townhouses, the applicant should shift some of the
proposed trees from the north side of the pond and the cul-de-sac to the south and east sides of
the pond. The city engineer also is recommending that the developer further landscape the
ponding area to break the appearance of the deep hole and to promote infiltration.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Approve the resolution starting on page 30. This resolution approves a conditional use
permit for a planned unit development for the Gardens development on the east side of
McMenemy Street, south of Roselawn Avenue. The city bases this approval on the findings
required by code. (Refer to the resolution for the specific findings.) ,Approval is subject to the
following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped May 3, 2001 except where the city
requires changes. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
(1) The required trail.
4
(2)
Revised storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by the
watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's NURP Pond
ordinance standards.
(3)
The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation and large
trees. These plans shall make every attempt possible to save the double oak
clump between Lots 2 and 3, the 8-inch oak tree south of Lot 6 and the basswood
clump in front of building 22.
(4) Summer Lane must be at least 28 feet wide to allow parking on its north side.
The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council
approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3.* Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans
shall include:
a. The grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, driveway, trails, tree
preservation/replacement, and parking plans. The cul-de-sac bulb shall have the
minimum radius necessary to ensure that emergency vehicles can turn around.
b. The following changes for the storm sewer plans:
(1)
There shall be an equalizer pipe between the proposed north pond and the
existing pond south of the site. This equalizer pipe shall be placed at or below
902.0, such that the elevations of both ponds would begin to equalize after
either pond was to reach an elevation of 902.0 This equalizer pipe would likely
run between Lots 15 and 16. The grades and elevations of the storm sewer
shall be designed and installed to prevent any storm sewer flow to the existing
pond south of the site until the north pond reaches an elevation of 902.0.
(2)
The developer shall enclose the new pond with a four-foot-high, black, vinyl-
coated chain-link fence. (The fence shall not be six-feet-high as shown on the
plans.) The contractor also shall install a gate in the fence as may be required
by the city engineer.
c. The following for the streets and driveways:
(1) Use D412 concrete curb and gutter along the building side (south and east
sides) of Summer Lane.
(2) Use B618 concrete curb and gutter along the north and west side of Summer
Lane between McMenemy Street and Lot 22.
(3)
Standard gutter-style catch basins to pick up street drainage. Drainage
structures that extend into garden areas may be 27-inch or 48-inch catch
basins with R-4342 castings.
d. A revised storm water management plan for the proposal.
5
Bo
e. Using, where at all feasible, the existing 6-inch water service stub when connecting
to the water main (rather than open cutting McMenemy Street).
f. Providing at least one additional fire hydrant between McMenemy Street and the end
of the cul-de-sac, so there are at least two hydrants along Summer Lane.
4. The design of the ponds shall meet Maplewood's NURP pond ordinance standards and
shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responsible
for getting any needed off-site pond and drainage easements, if applicable.
5. The developer or contractor shall:
a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, complete all public
improvements and meet all city requirements.
b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Remove any debris, junk or fill from the site.
d. Construct an eight-foot-wide paved public walkway and two-rail split-rail fencing
between Ripley Avenue and Summer Lane. This trail shall be over the sanitary sewer
line within the development site (between buildings 11 and 12) and along the west
property line of Lot 11 on the north side of Ripley Avenue.
The parks and recreation director shall approve the location and design.
e. Restore all disturbed areas within the pond with a native seed mix approved by the
watershed district and by the city engineer.
6. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Gardens PUD shall be:
a. Front-yard setback (from a private driveway): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - 25 feet
b. Front-yard setback (public side street): minimum - 30 feet, maximum - 35 feet
c. Rear-yard setback: minimum - 30 feet, maximum - none
d. Side yard setback: minimum - 10 feet to a property line and 20 feet minimum between
buildings
7. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each
housing unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit.
8. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
Approve the Gardens townhomes preliminary plat (received by the city on May 3, 2001). The
developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat:
1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and
meet all city requirements.
b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
Co
Provide all required and necessary easements (including ten-foot drainage and utility
easements along the front and raar lot lines of each lot and five-foot drainage and
utility easements along the side lot lines of each lot).
Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in at least two locations. One shall
be at the intersection of McMenemy Street and the proposed private driveway
(Summer Lane) and the other near the intersection of the trail and Summer Lane. The
exact style and location shall be subject to the city engineer's approval.
e. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification and no parking signs.
f. Cap, seal and abandon any wells that may be on the site, subject to Minnesota rules
and guidelines.
For the trail, complete the following:
(1) Provide an eight-foot-wide paved public walkway and two-rail split-rail fencing
from the private drive in the site (Summer Lane) between Lots 11 and 12 in the
proposed utility easement and along the west side of Lot 11 of the Markfort
Second Addition to Ripley Avenue. The trail easement for the trail shall be 18-
feet-wide.
(2) The developer shall install a two-rail split-rail fence on both sides of each trail and
posts at the end of the trail to prevent motorized vehicles from using the trail.
(3) The developer shall build the trail and fencing with the driveways and streets and
before the city approves a final plat.
(4) The city engineer must approve these plans.
h. Install a sign where Summer Lane intersects McMenemy Street indicating that it is a
private driveway.
2.* Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans
shall include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, trail, driveway and street
plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions:
a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code.
b. The grading plan shall show:
(1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each building
site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat.
(2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb.
(3) Building pads that reduce the grading on site where the developer can save large
trees.
(4) The street, driveway and trail grades as allowed by the city engineer.
7
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
c.* The
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the
plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1.
On slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a
stabilization and planting plan. These slopes shall be protected with wood fiber
blanket, be seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the
city approves the final plat.
All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than four feet require a
building permit from the city. The developer shall install a protective rail or fence
on top of any retaining wall that is taller than four feet.
Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city
engineer.
No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from
the affected property owner(s).
A minimum of a 10-foot-wide, 10:1 bench below the normal water level (NWL) of
any pond designed to be a wet pond. The depth of the pond below the NWL shall
not exceed four feet.
Emergency overflow swales as required by the city engineer or by the watershed
district. The overflow swales shall be 10 feet wide, one foot deep and protected
with approved permanent soil-stabilization blankets.
Restoration of the pond area being done with native seed mix or vegetation as
approved by the city engineer and by the watershed district. This requirement is
an addition to the required planting shown on the landscape plan.
Drainage areas and the developer's engineer shall provide the city engineer with
the drainage calculations. The drainage design shall accommodate the run off
from the entire project site and shall not increase the run-off from site.
tree plan shall:
Be approved by the city engineer before site grading or final plat approval.
Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan
shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. Specifically, the
developer shall make every effort to save the double oak clump between Lots 2
and 3, the 8-inch oak tree south of Lot 6 and the basswood clump in front of
building 22.
Show the size, species and location of the replacement and screening trees. The
deciduous trees shall be at least two and one half (2 %) inches in diameter and
shall be a mix of red and white oaks, ash, lindens, sugar maples or other native
species. The coniferous trees shall be at least eight (8) feet tall and shall be a mix
of Austrian pine and other species.
Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits.
Include for city staff a detailed tree planting plan and material list.
(6) Group the new trees together. These planting areas shall be:
(a) near the ponding areas
(b) on the slopes
(c) along thetrail
(d) along the south side of the site to help screen the development from the
existing houses to the south
(7) Show the planting of at least 71 trees after the site grading is done.
d. The street, driveway, trail, and utility plans shall show:
(1)
An eight-foot-wide bituminous trail between Ripley Avenue and Summer Lane.
This trail shall be over the sanitary sewer line within the development site
(between buildings 11 and 12) and along the west property line of Lot 11 on the
north side of Ripley Avenue.
The parks and recreation director shall approve the location and design.
(2)
The private driveway (Summer Lane) shall be a 9-ton design with a maximum
street grade of eight percent and the maximum street grade within 75 feet of all
intersections at two percent.
(3) Water service to ~ach lot and unit.
(4) Repair of McMenemy Street (street and boulevard) after the developer connects
to the public utilities and builds the private driveway.
(5) The developer enclosing the new pond with a four-foot-high, black, vinyl-coated
chain-link fence. (The fence shall not be six-feet-high as shown on the plans.)
The contractor also shall install a gate in the fence as may be required by the city
engineer.
(6) Size and location of the sanitary sewer service for the existing apartment building~
(7) The private driveways with continuous concrete curb and gutter except where the
city engineer decides that it is not needed for drainage purposes.
(8) The coordination of the water main locations, alignments and sizing with the
standards and requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services
(SPRWS). Fire flow requirements and hydrant locations shall be verified with the
Maplewood Fire Department.
(9) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of-ways or within
easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be
outside the project area.
(10)
(11)
The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities.
Details of the ponds and the pond outlets. The outlets shall be protected to
prevent erosion.
9
e. The drainage plan shall ensure that there is no increase in the rate of storm water run-
off leaving the site above the current (predevelopment) levels. The developer's
engineer shall:
(1) Verify pond, inlet and pipe capacities.
(2) Have the city engineer verify the drainage design calculations.
3. Pay the costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans.
4. Change the plat as follows:
a. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These
easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet
wide along the side property lines.
b. Label the common areas as outlots.
c. Show the trails in publicly-owned property or easements.
d. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer.
e. Label the private street as Summer Lane on all plans.
5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development. These shall include any
off-site drainage and utility easements.
6. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or
contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and
meet all city requirements.
b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Provide for the repair of McMenemy Street (street, curb and gutter and boulevard) after
the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the private driveway.
7. Record the following with the final plat:
a. All homeowners' association documents.
b. Deeds dedicating the necessary stream and wetland buffer easements surrounding the
stream and the wetlands.
c. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the
lots or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites unless approved by
the city council.
The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city
for approval before recording.
l0
o
10.
C=
Submit the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the Director of Community
Development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the
maintenance of the private utilities, driveways and structures.
The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site
drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that
the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval.
Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading.
If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the Director of Community
Development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat.
*The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or
approves the final plat.
Approve the plans date-stamped May 3, 2001 (site plan, landscape plan, grading and
drainage plans and building elevations) for The Gardens. The city bases this approval on the
findings required by the code. The developer or contractor shall do the following:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
2. Complete the following before the city issues a building permit:
Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These
plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, sidewalk and
driveway and parking lot plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions:
(1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code.
(2) The grading plan shall:
(a) Include building, floor elevation and contour information.
(b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb.
(c)
Show sedimentation basins or ponds as may be required by the
watershed board or by the city engineer.
(3) All the parking areas and the Summer Lane shall have continuous concrete
curb and gutter except where the city engineer decides it is not needed.
(4)
There shall be no parking on the south side of the 28-foot-wide Summer Lane.
The developer or contractor shall post Summer Lane and the driveways with
no parking signs to meet the above-listed standard.
b. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction and have each building staked by
a registered land surveyor.
11
c. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval which incorporates the following
details:
(1) All lawn areas shall be sodded. The city engineer shall determine the vegetation
within the ponding area and the rain water gardens.
(2) Shifting some of the trees proposed for the north side of the pond and the cul-de-
sac to the south and east sides of the pond.
(3) The developer shall install landscaping in the ponding area to break the
appearance of the deep hole and to promote infiltration. Such landscaping shall
be approved by the city engineer and shall be shown on the project landscape
plans.
(4) Having in-ground irrigation for all landscape areas (code requirement).
(5) The plantings proposed around the front of the units shown on the landscape
plan date-stamped May 3, 2001, shall remain on the plan.
(6) ^ concrete walk from the driveway to the door of each unit.
d. Show that Ramsey County has recorded the final plat for this development.
3. Complete the following before occupying each building:
a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction.
b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards and sod all turf areas.
c. Complete all landscaping and turf irrigation for that building and its rain water
garden(s).
d. Install the required concrete curb and gutter.
e. Put addresses on each building for each unit.
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.
b. The city receives cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work.
The amount shall be 150 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. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
12
CITIZENS' COMMENTS
I surveyed the owners of the 37 properties within 350 feet of this site.
objected and three had comments.
Of the six replies, three
Objections
1. Sloan Place, DeSoto and Roselawn, DeSoto and Mount Vernon, 1860 McMenemy, Skillman
and Bradley, now this plan, plus businesses. I would say you are creating all rental units in this
area. Why not 1 family homes? Spread the joy and wealth of rental units (to other parts of
Maplewood). (Chinander - 328 Bellwood Avenue)
Staff note: The proposed development would have owner-occupied units - the developer is not
proposing rental housing.
2. We do not want townhouses to be built there, because we do not want more houses in the
neighborhood. (Frans - 1866 McMenemy Street)
3. Having received the updated proposal for the Gardens Townhomes, I am more opposed than in
my previous response. This proposal is more intrusive land-wise. I would not have purchased
this property 2 years ago knowing this was in the works. Part of the allure of our current
property is the peace and tranquility that surrounds us. This new proposal shows much of that
will be taken away from us. (McDonald's - 379 Ripley Avenue)
Comments
If Lot 11 on Ripley Avenue is zoned R-l, why is it being included as part of the development
under 13,-3 property? What purpose is Lot 11 serving to this development? I do not want Lot 11
changed to multi-housing nor do I think Lot 11 needs to be included in the development.
(Vogt- 378 Ripley Avenue)
Staff note: Lot 11 on Ripley Avenue is owned by the person that owns the proposed
development site. This proposal does not change the zoning for or use Lot 11 as part of the
development plan. Lot 11 would stay zoned for a single-family home.
Also see the letters from Audrey Duellman and Jay Swenson on pages 28 and 29 for additional
comments.
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 5 acres
Existing land use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North:
South:
West:
East:
Existing Apartment building at 1860 McMenemy Street and Saint Jeromes
Houses on McMenemy Street and on Ripley Avenue and a ponding area
MnDOT property and undeveloped property across McMenemy Street
Houses on DeSoto Street
PLANNING
Existing Land Use Plan designations: R-3(M) (medium density residential)
Existing Zoning: R-3 (multiple-family residential)
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards.
Refer to the findings in the resolution on pages 30 through 33.
Ordinance Requirements
Section 25-70 of the city code requires that the community design review board (CDRB) make the
following findings to approve plans:
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
HOUSING POLICIES
The land use plan has eleven general land use goals. Of these, three apply to this proposal. They
are: minimize land planned for streets, minimize conflicts between land uses and provide many
housing types. The land use plan also has several general development and residential
development policies that relate to this project. They are:
- Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a negative economic,
social or physical impact on adjoining developments.
14
Include a vadety of housing types for all types of residents, regardless of age, ethnic, racial,
cultural or socioeconomic background. A diversity of housing types should include apartments,
townhouses, manufactured homes, single-family housing, public-assisted housing and Iow-to-
moderate-income housing, and rental and owner-occupied housing.
- Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate
buffering and separation.
The housing plan also has policies about housing diversity and quality that the city should
consider with this development. They are:
- Promote a variety of housing types, costs and ownership options throughout the city. These are
to meet the life-cycle needs of all income levels, those with special needs and nontraditional
households.
The city will continue to provide dispersed locations for a diversity of housing styles, types and
price ranges through its land use plan.
The city's long-term stability of its tax base depends upon its ability to attract and keep residents of
all ages. To do so, the city must insure that a diverse mix of housing styles is available in each
stage of the life cycle of housing needs.
Application Date
We received the complete applications and plans for this development on May 3, 2001. State law
requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal.
As such, city action is required on this proposal by July 2, 2001.
p:sec17/gardens.mem
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Land Use Plan Map
3. Property Line/Zoning Map
4. Proposed Preliminary Plat
5. Proposed Utility Plan
6. Proposed Grading Plan
7. Proposed Landscape Plan dated 05-03-01
8. Typical Unit Plantings Plan dated 05-03-01
9. Proposed Building Elevations dated 03-01-01
10. Proposed Building Elevations dated 03-01-01
11. Proposed Building Elevations
12. Proposed Building Elevations
13. Letter dated May 15, 2001 from Audrey Duellman
14. Letter dated May 14, 2001 from Jay Swenson
15. Conditional Use Permit Resolution
16. Project Plans date-stamped May 3, 2001 (separate attachments)
15
Attachment
C
2640N
2400N
PLAZA C/R
ALVARADO DR
BELLECR£Er DR
DEAUVILLE DR
~4ERIDIAN DR
3
<~
z
<~
RD. B2
COUNTY
LI'i-I'LE CANADA
RD. B
~..
SKILLMAN AVE.
U
O
FENTO
KINGSTON
VERNON
~W, NS ^yE.
BELLWOOD
SUUMER AVE.
OR.
J BELMONT LN. J
ROSELAWN
LWOOD
AVE. Edgerto~
AVE.
AVE.
BELMONT
BELLWOOD
KINOSTON~: AVE.
I1®
ST. PAUL
~¥r,
OC
LOCATION
16
MAP
Attachment 2
OS
1
interc
LU
R-3(H)
SITE
" , Lar'penteur major
KEY =
S = SCHOOL O
C = CHURCH '~
t,.,.
G = GOVERNMENT ·
OS = OPEN SPACE O~
CEM = CEMETERY
Ri = SINGLE DWELLING RESIDENTIAL
....... R3M = MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
LAND USE MAP
17
after'iai
R-3(H),
BC
B-C(M)
Attachment 3
1' /'~"~ .... ~ ~ ~'~ ' II .'rsk) ' ' ' "
.' :~ SITE " ,
~** ~ H .... ~- I~:~ _, - ~:-1~c ......~"L~'~='~
B , ~.o~. ~r~ o- M~ C4) ~ I
~ / ~ ~/' ,. ,. ~" ,~. ' ~'~ ..... .
i $ '1 ,~,~ rd~:;.., ' ~ KEY ' '
' ~ ' ~ '~) M1 = LIGHT MANUFACTURING
Attachment 4
I
PRELIMINARY PLAT
C~), of M~:4*,,.~ RamMy Coufl~),. Id~nesoto
835.9?,
SUMMER LANE
o;
RIPLEY
POND
CII~TIFIC~TI ~q
4/2001 07:16:31 ^M, PLOT RY BETH
PROPOSED PRELIMINARY
19
Attachment 5
~,4g '02r 03,' k
HARKFORT
Attachment 6
HARKFOR r [
9 '
SECO~IO
I //'
II MARKFORT ADD.
_,-_~.] .......................
/ v
"'"~"~ IqI F'LEY
AVE
THE
Attachment 7
j !
MA,~q"E RPIEC~
IdOR~E A.~OCIA'I"E~
Attachment 8
23
Attachment 9
24 ~
~tt~chment 10
I
'i
BLDG. l'3& 14
Attachment ll
, ~ j.,i.,, q,;.ill
!i',[?
Ii
26
Attachment 12
MAY-iS-200i 09:5iA FROM:AUDREY DUELLMAN 65i7938i14
TO:6SI??OqSg? P:l/1
Attachment 13
Mr. Ken Roberts ~ Maplewood City Hall
FromAudrey Duellman 1843 Desoto Maplewood, Mn. 55117 MAY 1 5 200I
RECE1VED
In response to your letter concerning the property on Mcmenemy
St. that borders our property.
Please tell the builder to respect all property lines. There will be
no grading on our property or our son's property at 1835 Desoto.
We are having the property resurveyed and if it is not properly
marked we still hold the builder responsible to honor all property
lines.
What type of grading will be done and how will it affect our
property?
Will there be any change to our water and sewer - we do not want
to have to pay anything for this development. We still have a well
and are always concerned when there is changes is our area.
Looks like a good project but change is sometimes hard.
One other concern is the property at the comer of Desoto and
Roselawn- shouldn't the pond be fenced? We are concerned about
the school being so close. Why does the one on Ripley have to be
fenced and now the one on Mcmenemy but not the one on
Desoto??
There are probably other things but these are the most important to
us. Tom & Audrey Duellman 651-774-1530
28
KENNY
622 660 3340 P.02
Attachment 14
May 14, 2001
To whom it may concern,
I am wdting this letter regarding the proposed Gardens twin homes on McMenemy
Street. Upon reviewing the updated plans, it appears that the homes have been
moved farther away from my lot line. The plans also show a drainage pond dug on
the east side of the existing building rather than the southwest corner of the property
as shown on the original plans. While this may, in fact, eliminate drainage concerns I
had about my property, the additional twin home(s) placed in that first pond location
bring up the issue of a further decrease in my privacy and the aesthetic value of my
home. Again, it is imperative that these home blend in with the surrounding area. In
particular; my home and property.
If, in fact, the homes are placed farther to the north of me, the preserving of the
trees(large and small) and bushes which provide privacy for my property can be
successful.
Since it is difficult to fully imagine the impact these homes will have on my property, I
am also asking the developer to construct a privacy fence along my lot line.
Thank you for taking into consideration my concerns,
Jay Swenson
1780 McMenemy Street
R E C .E [ E
29 TOTRL P.02
Attachment 15
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. Gordie Howe, representing Masterpiece Homes, applied for a conditional use
permit (CUP) for the Gardens residential planned unit development (PUD).
WHEREAS, this permit applies to undeveloped property next to the apartment building at 1860
McMenemy Street, south of Roselawn Avenue in Section 17, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey
County, Minnesota. (PINS 17-29-22-32-0009.)
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
On May 21, 2001, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve
this permit.
On ,2001, the city council held a public headng. 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, 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 run-off, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic
features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
3O
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped May 3, 2001 except where the city
requires changes. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
(1) The required trail.
(2)
Revised storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by the
watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's NURP Pond
ordinance standards.
(3)
The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation and large trees.
These plans shall make every attempt possible to save the double oak clump
between Lots 2 and 3, the 8-inch oak tree south of Lot 6 and the basswood clump
in front of building 22.
(4) Summer Lane must be at least 28 feet wide to allow parking on its north side.
The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or
the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3.* Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
include:
The grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, driveway, trails, tree
preservation/replacement, and parking plans. The cul-de-sac bulb shall have the
minimum radius necessary to ensure that emergency vehicles can turn around.
b. The following changes for the storm sewer plans:
(1)
There shall be an equalizer pipe between the proposed north pond and the existing
pond south of the site. This equalizer pipe shall be placed at or below 902.0, such
that the elevations of both ponds would begin to equalize after either pond was to
reach an elevation of 902.0 This equalizer pipe would likely run between Lots 15
and 16. The grades and elevations of the storm sewer shall be designed and
installed to prevent any storm sewer flow to the existing pond south of the site until
the north pond reaches an elevation of 902.0.
(2)
The developer shall enclose the new pond with a four-foot-high, black, vinyl-coated
chain-link fence. (The fence shall not be six-feet-high as shown on the plans.) The
contractor also shall install a gate in the fence as may be required by the city
engineer.
c. The following for the streets and driveways:
31
=
(1) Use D412 concrete curb and gutter along the building side (south and east sides) of
Summer Lane.
(2) Use B618 concrete curb and gutter along the north and west side of Summer Lane
between McMenemy Street and Lot 22.
(3) Standard gutter-style catch basins to pick up street drainage. Drainage structures
that extend into garden areas may be 27-inch or 48-inch catch basins with R-4342
castings.
d. A revised storm water management plan for the proposal.
e. Using, where at all feasible, the existing 6-inch water service stub when connecting to the
water main (rather than open cutting McMenemy Street).
f. Providing at least one additional fire hydrant between McMenemy Street and the end of
the cul-de-sac, so there are at least two hydrants along Summer Lane.
The design of the ponds shall meet Maplewood's NURP pond ordinance standards and shall
be subject to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responsible for getting
any needed off-site pond and drainage easements, if applicable.
The developer or contractor shall:
a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, complete all public
improvements and meet all city requirements.
b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Remove any debris, junk or fill from the site.
d. Construct an eight-foot-wide paved public walkway and two-rail split-rail fencing between
Ripley Avenue and Summer Lane. This trail shall be over the sanitary sewer line within
the development site (between buildings 11 and 12) and along the west property line of
Lot 11 on the north side of Ripley Avenue.
The parks and recreation director shall approve the location and design.
e. Restore all disturbed areas within the pond with a native seed mix approved by the
watershed district and by the city engineer.
The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Gardens PUD shall be:
a. Front-yard setback (from a private driveway): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - 25 feet
b. Front-yard setback (public side street): minimum - 30 feet, maximum - 35 feet
c. Rear-yard setback: minimum - 30 feet, maximum - none
d. Side yard setback: minimum - 10 feet to a property line and 20 feet minimum between
buildings
32
7. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each housing
unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit.
8. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on
2001.
33
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
City Manager
Thomas Ekstmnd, Assistant Communi~ Development Dim~or
Resolution of Appreciation forJonLaCasse
May 17,2001
INTRODUCTION
Enclosed is a resolution of appreciation for Jon LaCasse. Jon served as a member of the
community design review board for 1% years, from August, 23, 1999.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution.
p:com_dvpt~cd rbres.app(6.2)
Attachment:
Resolution of Appreciation
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIA ~ON
WHERF~S, Jon LaCasse has been a member of the Maplewood Community
Design Review Board since August 23, 1999 and has served faithfully in that capacity; and
I~'IE~S, the Community Design Review Board has appreciated his experience,
insights and goodjudgement; and
WHEREAS, Jon has freely given of his time and energy, without compensation, for
the betterment of the City of Maplewood; and
WHEREAS, Jon has shown dedication to his duties and has consistently
contributed his leadership and effort for the benefit of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED for and on behalf of the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota, and its citizens that Jon LaCasse is hereby extended our gratitude
and appreciation for his dedicated service and we wish him continued success in the futur~
Passed by the Maplewood
City Council on June 11, 2001
Robert Cardinal, Mayor
Passed by the Maplewood
Community Design Review Board
on May 22, 200L
Matt Ledvina, Chairperson
Attest:
Karen Guilfoile, Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
City Manager
Thomas Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director
New Member Orientation - Community Design Review Board
May 2, 2001
INTRODUCTION
To assist new community design review board (CDRB) members, I have put together this brief
orientation. I hope this information will be helpful to understand the objectives of the CDRB as
well as their review process, responsibilities and scope of authority.
ORIENTATION
Origination of the CDRB and Committee Purpose/Objective
The CDRB was established by the city council in 1972 to "encourage the ordedy and harmonious
growth of the city." The objective of the board is to ~provide for the orderly and harmonious
appearance of structure and property, maintain the public health, safety and welfare, maintain
property values and encourage the physical development of the city as intended by the
comprehensive plan." I have enclosed a copy of the CDRB ordinance.
Approval Authority and Appeals
CDRB Actions
The CDRB has the authority to approve development proposals when there are no zoning or land
use issues (variances, conditional use permits, right-of-way vacations, rezonings, etc). Zoning
and land use issues are reviewed by the planning commission who forward a recommendation to
the city council. Development reviews take into account issues like building aesthetics (including
design and materials), grading and drainage, landscaping, parking lot layouts and traffic flow (on
and off site). The CDRB also reviews sign plans for commercial buildings with five or more
tenants.
Appeals of CDRB Decisions
Anyone can appeal a CDRB decision. An appellant has 15 days from the CDRB action to lodge
an appeal. The city council reviews all appeals.
Staff Approvals of Minor Construction Proposals
The code allows staff to approve minor construction proposals. Minor construction projects are
those that do not exceed $20,000 for new construction or for changes to buildings not previously
approved by the CDRB. ~Minor construction" also includes construction projects that do not
exceed $200,000 for changes to buildings that were approved by the CDRB.
When staff approves a minor construction proposal, we submit a copy of the report to the CDRB
and the city council for review. If a member of the board or council has questions or concerns
with the proposal or the staff decision, they should contact staff to discuss them. The board may
appeal the staff decision. Remember, though, do so within the 15-day appeal pedod.
Agenda Packets
City staff will prepare the CDRB agenda packet the week before the scheduled meeting. The
packets contain the staff report and plans for each item to be reviewed. We mail the packets to
the CDRB member's homes so they receive them the Fdday before the meeting.
Plans
Please retum your plans to staff after the meeting. We need these to include in city council
packets. Applicants sometimes want the extras back.
CDRB Member Responsibility
Each board member should review the staff reports and visit the properties in question to form
an opinion of the project and become familiar with the proposal before the meeting.
Meeting Dates, Starting Time, Meeting Location, Quorum, Meeting Cancellations and CDRB
Officers
Meeting dates: The 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of each month.
Starting time: 6 p.m.
Meeting Location: City council chambers at Maplewood City Hall, 1830 E. County Road B
Quorum:
Three members must be present to vote and take action on a proposal.
Cancellations/
Rescheduling:
Staff will inform the CDRB of meeting cancellations. Meetings are canceled
when we cannot get a quorum or if there are no new proposals to review.
Sometimes we schedule instead of cancel meetings based on urgencies of
the developer in the event they cannot wait another two weeks. On occasion,
we combine the two meetings into one meeting a month based on work load
and board-member schedules.
Officers:
Each January, the CDRB elects a chairperson and vice chairperson.
Rules of Procedure
I have touched on many of the provisions noted in the Rules of Procedure already. Refer to the
attachment for the complete "Rules."
2
Design Requirements
I attached a handout titled Standard Site Design Requirements that we give to developers. Most
of these items are ordinance requirements. This handout deals with items like setback, parking
and landscaping requirements.
Community Development Staff
The community development department consists of four planners (the director, assistant
director and two associate planners), three full-time building inspectors (the building official and
two inspectors), one environmental health official and five clerical staff personnel (two full-time
and three part-time).
Telephone numbers for staff members that you may need are:
Melinda Coleman, Director of Community Development/
Assistant City Manager (651) 770-4526
Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director (651) 770-4562
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner (651) 770-4566
Shann Finwall, Associate Planner (651) 770-4563
Andrea Sindt, Department Secretary (651) 770-4560
Other Telephone CDRB Numbers
I have enclosed a current of the telephone numbers for the city council, planning commission and
CDRB for your reference.
SUMMARY
I hope that this is useful. Please call me any time if you have any questi~ abd~fl'fis
information or about any of our review items while you serve on the CDRB.' We{re. orffe abomdJ
pcom_dvpt\ofientat, drb (6.2)
Attachments:
1. CDRB Ordinance
2. CDRB Rules of Procedure
3. Standard Site Design Requirements
4. Telephone Numbers for City Council, Planning Commission and CDRB
3
Attachment 1
0
0
0
PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCIES
§ 25-70
Sec. 25-70. Review of application and accompanying ma-
terials; required findings for recommended
approval; recommended conditions for ap-
proval; etc.
(a) The community design review board shall review the written
materials submitted with the application under section 25-68 of this
article with respect to the following aspects of the proposal:
(1) Generalsite utilization.
(2) General architectural considerations, including a review of:
a. The height, bulk and area of all buildings on the site.
~.'; The colors and materials to be used.
c. The physical and architectural relationship of the pro-
posed structure with existing and proposed structures
in the area.
d. The site, layout, orientation and location of all buildings
and structures and their relationship with open areas
and the topography.
e. Height, materials, colors and variations in boundary
walls, fences or screen plantings.
f. Appropriateness of sign design, where provided by arti-
cie III of chapter 36 of this Code, and exterior lighting.
(3) General landscaping considerations.
(4) Graphics to be used. -
(b) To recommend approval of an application, the board shall
make the following findings:
(1) That the design and location of the proposed development
and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed de-
velopments 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 eh-
joyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments;
and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion.
(2) That the design and location of the proposed development is
in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighbor-
hood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and
1551
§ 25-70 MAPLEWOOD CODE
attractive development contemplated by this article and the
city comprehensive municipal plan.
(3) 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.
(c) The board, in its recommended actions for approval, may:
(1) Recommend any conditions that it deems reasonable to its
action of approval.
(2) Recommend that the applicant, as a condition, provide guar-
antees that the conditions of approval will be complied with.
(Ord. No. 334, § 8, 10-19-72; Ord. No. 427, § 18, 7-14-77)
Sec. 25-71. Hecommendations for the establishment of
special community design review areas and
specific development criteria in relation
thereto.
The community design review board may, from time to time at its
discretion, recommend to the planning commission that certain
special community design review areas, and that specific criteria to
be considered in reviewing applications for development within said
areas, be established. The planning commission shall review such
recommendations and shall recommend approval, modification or
denial of same to the city council. The city council shall take the
final action on all such recommendations and may designate said
areas by resolution. (Ord. No. 334, § 10, 10-19-72)
Sec. 25-72. Final inspections and occupancy permits for
developments reviewed by board.
No final inspection shall be made or occupancy permit shall be
granted as to any development reviewed by the community design
review board pursuant to this art/cie, unless the completed work
complies with the plans approved and the conditions required by
the city council pursuant to the provisions of this article. (Ord. No.
334, § 11, 10-19-72)
1552
[The next page is 1603]
Attachment 2
COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
RULES OF PROCEDURE
We, the members of the Community Design Review Board of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota,
created pursuant to Article IV, Section 25 of the Code of Ordinances, hereby adopt the following
"Rules of Procedure," subject to the provisions of said Article, which is hereby made a part of
these Rules:
I. MEETINGS
Ao
All meetings shall be held in the council chambers in Maplewood City Hall, 1830 E.
County Road B, unless otherwise directed by the chairperson or staff, in which case at
least 24 hours notice will be given to all members.
Regular meetings shall be held at 6 p.m. on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each
calendar month, provided that when the meeting falls on a legal holiday or voting day,
such meeting shall be rescheduled.
Special meetings may be held upon call by the chairperson, or in his/her absence, by
the vice chairperson, or by any other member with the concurrence of two other
members of the board with at least 48 hours notice to all members.
II.
QUORUM
A. Three members of the board shall constitute a quorum.
Any member who abstains from voting on a particular question because of possible
conflict of interest shall not be considered to be a member of the board for the purpose
of determining a quorum for the consideration of the issue.
C. Any action by the board shall require a majority vote of the members present.
III. DUTIES OF THE CHAIRMAN
Ao
In addition to presiding at all meetings of the board, the chairperson shall appoint such
standing committees and temporary committees as may be required, and such
committees will be charged with the duties, examinations, investigations, and inquiries
relative to subjects assigned by the chairperson.
B. No standing or temporary committee shall have the power to commit the board to the
endorsement of any plan or program without the express approval of the board.
IV. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Ao
The chairperson, vice chairperson and such officers as the board may decide are
needed, shall be appointed at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve
until their successors have been duly elected and qualified.
In the absence of the chairperson, the vice chairperson shall perform the duties of the
chairperson. In the event that both are absent, the members present shall elect a
chairperson pro tern.
Vo
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD VACANCIES
A. The following are grounds for recommending to the city council the dismissal of a
community design review board member:
1. Failure to serve, as shown by failure to attend six meetings in any calendar year,
without good cause.
2. Resignation in writing.
3. Taking public office in Maplewood.
4. Moving out of Maplewood.
VI.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
A. In addition to carrying out the duties prescribed in city ordinance, the director or a
designated replacement, shall:
1. Prepare the agenda for each meeting.
2. Act as technical advisor to the board on any matter which comes before the
board.
3. Make written recommendations to the board on matters such as, but not limited
to, architectural plans, site plans, signage and landscaping proposals.
4. Inspect the construction of all projects approved by the board for plan compliance.
5. Schedule any matter with the city council that has been reviewed by the board that
requires city council approval.
VII.
AGENDA
Ao
Copies of the agenda, together with pertinent staff reports and copies of the minutes of
the previous meeting, shall be made available to each member of the board not later
than three days prior to the next scheduled meeting.
B. The agenda format shall read as follows:
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
4. Approval of Agenda
l0
5. Unfinished Business
6. Design Review
7. Visitor Presentations
8. Board Presentations
9. Staff Presentations
10. Adjournment
The board shall only consider items on the agenda.
The board's review shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following items:
1. Site Considerations:
a. Utilities
b. Drainage
c. Landscaping - fence, screening
d. Traffic flow, parking and driveway access
e. Trash receptacle enclosure
f. Building setbacks
g. Security lighting
h. Access for emergency vehicles
Architectural Considerations:
a. Materials - compatible with neighboring buildings; such as block, metal,
brick, etc., including colors.
b. Building aesthetics- compatible with neighboring buildings, scale of building,
size in relation to surroundings, flat roof vs. pitched roof, etc.
c. Location and concealment of outside equipment, e.g. air conditioning, and
outside storage yards.
VIII. AMENDMENT OR SUSPENSION OF RULES
A. Any of the foregoing rules may be temporarily suspended by a majority vote of the
members present.
B. The "Rules of Procedure" may be amended at any regular meeting by a majority vote.
IX. RULES OF ORDER
Except as herein provided, Robert's Rules of Order, shall be followed.
p:miscellVules.drb(6.2)
Revised: March 24, 1997
11
Attachment 3
STANDARD SITE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109
770-4560
All developments shall be required to meet the following design standards:
Parking lots
Minimum parking lot dimensions:
90 Degree Parking (in feet)
Use Stall width Stall length Aisle width
Customer, high turnover
Customer, Iow turnover
Employee only
10 18 24
9.5 18 24
9.0 18 24
Customer, high turnover
Customer, Iow turnover
Employee only
60 Degree Parking (in feet)
10 15.6 22
9.5 15.6 22
9.0 15.6 22
45 Degree Parking (in feet)
Customer, high turnover
Customer, Iow turnover
Employee only
10 12.6 22.6
9.5 12.6 22.6
9.0 12.6 22.6
"Customer, high turnover" uses include shopping centers, retail sales, fast food
restaurants, convenience centers and similar uses. "Customer, Iow turnover"
uses include offices, industrial, schools, churches, research, multiple-dwellings,
motels, sit-down restaurants and similar uses.
You may reduce the parking stall length by 2.5 feet for 90 degree parking and
two feet for angle parking if the parking space abuts a curb, sidewalk or
landscaped area.
Handicap-accessible parking spaces shall meet ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act)
requirements. These spaces shall be adjacent to the building whenever possible.
12
o
9.
10.
11.
In shopping centers and other large developments, you must orient the parking drives
closest to the building, perpendicular to the building whenever practical.
Do not put a parking stall in front of a building entrance, if there is no sidewalk there.
Do not use interlocking or herringbone designs for parking stalls.
The City may require a ten-foot-wide planter or median strip every three or four parking
rows. The purpose is to prevent high-speed movement diagonally across the parking lot
and to improve esthetics.
Provide continuous concrete curb around all parking lots and drives having 13 or more
parking spaces. Curbing may be required around smaller lots if it is needed for drainage
control.
You must pave all parking lots and drives.
Curb cuts shall be thirty feet in width.
Collect all parking lot drainage and pipe it to a storm sewer when available.
Minimum number of parking stalls required:
a. Retail and office--one space/200 square feet of gross floor area.
bo
Warehouse and manufacturing--one space/each two employees or one
space/1,000 square feet of warehousing and one space/400 square feet for
manufacturing, whichever is more.
Co
Restaurant-one space/each 50 square feet of floor area devoted to patron use.
Patron areas include everything but "employee only" areas.
do
Theaters, auditoriums, churches, or other places of public assemblage--one
space/four seats. Schools--one space/4 auditorium seats.
Minimum setback~
The following minimum setbacks are required:
1. A 15-foot landscaped yard between a parking lot and a public right-of-way.
2. A 30-foot front building setback for commercial, industrial and multi-family
developments.
3. A 50-foot building setback when abutting property that is used or shown on the City's
land use plan for residential use. This setback shall be increased up to one hundred
(100) feet based on the more restrictive of the following requirements:
13
ao
bo
Building height: The building setbacks shall be increased two (2) feet for each
one foot the building exceeds twenty-five (25) feet in height.
Exterior wall area: VVhere an exterior wall faces a residentially zoned property,
the wall setback from the residential lot line shall be as follows:
o
Wall Area (square feet)
Minimum Setback
(feet)
0 -1999 50
2000-2999 75
3000 or mom 100
You must provide a landscaped area of not less than twenty feet in width where:
A nonresidential use abuts residentially-zoned property.
A multiple dwelling abuts property zoned for single or double dwellings.
Screening
The City may require the screening of outdoor storage where such storage would be
visible from residential areas or roadways. The City may also require screening where
the storage is unsightly to adjacent commercial development.
2. Roof-top equipment shall be screened when it can be viewed from residential properties.
o
Screen parking lots where the light from automobile headlights and other sources would
shine onto residential windows. To meet the screening requirement, you must use a
decorative wood fence, berming, evergreen plantings or a combination of these.
Screening must be at least six-feet-tall and 80% opaque upon installation.
o
You must provide trash container enclosures for any outdoor trash storage. Provide
concrete-filled steel posts, or the equivalent, anchored in the ground at the front corners
of the enclosure. If the enclosure is masonry, you may omit the protective posts. You
must have a 100% opaque wooden gate installed on the enclosure.
Landscaping
Landscape design and materials should help to relate the architecture to the site and to
the surrounding environment.
Landscaping and grading plans must maximize the preservation of desirable existing
vegetation and the use of native plants.
3. Try to use maple trees when appropriate.
14
4. Minimum tree sizes: 2 % inch B & B minimum for large deciduous trees, 1% inch B & B
minimum for ornamental deciduous trees and 6-foot height minimum for evergreen
trees.
5. Try not to space trees more than thirty feet apart.
6. Maplewood does not allow Russian olive trees.
1. Provide security lighting.
2. Have all exterior lighting directed on-site so there is no glare onto adjacent property or
streets.
Please contact the Planning Office for specific requirements concerning your site.
Attachment 4
FOR CITY USE ONLY
Bob Cardinal, Mayor
2497 Adele Street N 55109
651-765-8600 - home
612-831-3300 - work
651-503-8800 - cell
651-765-8700 - Fax
cardinal@usinternet.com
Marv Koppen
1998 Ripley Av E 55109
651-770-5391 - home
651-770-1447 - city use only
Sherry Allenspach
1893 Birmingham St N 55109
651-779-8470 - home
651-771-3578 - city use only
651-771-0869 - Fax
Julie Wasiluk
1747 Frank St N 55109
651-776-2633- home
jawasiluk@aol.com
Kenneth Collins
1238 Shryer Av E 55109
651-483-1149 - home
kvcollins@aol.com
COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Matt Ledvina, Chair
1173 Lakewood Dr S 55119
651-578-1658 - home
612-339-2316 - work
612-339.4990 - fax
Ananth Shankar
2460 King Av E 55119
651-730-5966 - home
651-290-1938 - work
Tim Johnson
1649 Lakewood Dr N 55119
651-770-5547 - home
651-770-9600 - work (ask for Millwork)
Craig Jorgenson
1639 Sandhurst Av E 55109
651-779-8742 - home
612-883-6313 - work
Linda Olson
2005 County Rd C East 55109
651-777-1288 - home
612-373-6414 - work
16
PLANNING COMMISSION
Lorraine B. Fischer, Chair
1812 Furness St 55109
651-777-5037 - home
651-215-2259-work (Tue & Thu p.m.)
William Rossbach
1386 County Road C E 55109
651-484-5427 - home
651-779-0218 - work
612-363-6832 - pager & mobile (call first)
Gary A. Pearson
1209 Antelope Way 55119
651-777-9197 - home
651-454-8128 - work (not on Monday)
651-777-1341 - work (not on Monday)
Jack Frost
2324 Maple Lane E 55109
651-777-8019 - home
651-602-1078 - work
Matt Ledvina
1173 Lakewood Dr S 55119
651-578-1658 - home
612-339-2316 - work
612-339-4990 - fax
Dale Trippler
1201 Junction Avenue E 55109-3433
651-490-1485 - home
651-297-8483 - work
Paul Mueller
1820 Onacrest Court 55117
651-487-5514 - home
651-641-8830 - work
Eric Ahlness
2062 English St.
Maplewood, MN 55109
651-486-9402- home
651-282-4401 - work
Mary Dierich
2720 Carver Ave
Maplewood, MN 55119
651-731-8083 - home
p:\com_dvpt\office\commpri.dir
rev. 040301