Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/10/2001BOOK AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD July 10, 2001 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 a. b. June 12,2001 3M Leadership Development Institute Remodel - 600 Carlton Street Dean's Tavern Addition - 1986 Rice Street 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Board Presentations 9. Staff Presentations a. CDRB representation needed for the July 23 and August 13 city council meetings. I0. 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 JUNE 12, 2001 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL III. IV. Matt Ledvina Present Ananth Shankar Present Tim Johnson Present Craig Jorgenson Present Linda OIson Present Staff Present: Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Recording Secretary: APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mo May 22, 2001 JoAnn Morin Board member OIson noted a change to the May 22 minutes on Page 3, Paragraph 8, Line 2, "proposed trial" should read "proposed trail". Board member Ledvina noted a change to the minutes on Page 6, Item 7, Line 2, "The pond shall incorporate curbed elements..." should read "The pond shall incorporated curved elements..." Board member Olson moved approval of the minutes of May 22, 2001 as amended. Board member Shankar seconded. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ayes--3 Board Members Johnson & Jorgenson abstained. Board member Johnson moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Board member Jorgenson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 06-12-01 -2- VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Afton Ridge Townhomes - Thone Builders and Developers, Inc., McKnight Road and Lower Afton Road. Shann Finwall, Associate Planner, gave the staff report. She stated that Tim Thone of Thone Builders and Developers is proposing a 40-unit townhouse development on a 4.22-acre parcel of land located on the southeast corner of Lower Afton and McKnight Roads. This property is zoned and planned Commercial Office and Limited Business Commercial. The surrounding properties include the Holiday Station Store directly on the corner of McKnight and Lower Afton Roads, the Battle Creek Regional Park to the north across Lower Afton Road, a strip mall and apartment rental units across McKnight Road in St. Paul, and single-family units directly to the south of the site. Mr. Thone is requesting the following approvals for this development. First, an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan from Commercial Office and Limited Business Commercial to Residential High Density. Second, rezone the property from Commercial Office and Limited Business Commercial District to Multi-Family Residential. Third, preliminary and final plat approval. Fourth, design approval. The Planning Commission did review the comprehensive land use amendment, rezoning, and plat and recommended approval at their June 4, 2001 meeting. Tonight, Mr. Thone is looking for approval of the building, landscaping, lighting, and parking design. Mr. Thone's development includes four buildings with a total of 40 units. Two of the buildings will have access onto McKnight Road; two of the buildings will have access onto Lower Afton Road. The McKnight Road buildings will have six units in each building, all with two-car garages, and front entry with a rear walkout. The Lower Afton Road buildings will include 14 units in each building, with 7-units on each side, back to back. The interior units of these buildings will have single width garages, but will be two car lengths deep. The exterior units will have two-car wide garages. The buildings will have earth-tone vinyl siding, vinyl shake accents under the windows and brick exterior on the garage levels. Existing conditions on the site include a number of mature Cottonwood trees interspersed with other deciduous trees and one large pine, located in the middle of the property. According to the proposed grading plan, it appears that a number of the mature trees can be saved. Particularly considering that the Planning Commission did recommend that the buildings located on the McKnight Road side of the development be pushed further to the south towards the Holiday Station Store. The developer is receptive to saving as many of the trees as possible. The landscape plan submitted does not depict the trees that will be saved. Therefore, a new landscape plan will be required prior to submittal of the grading permit. There should be landscape screening of the single-family properties, particularly screening from the townhome's vehicle headlights. This will also have to be addressed during the landscape review. Staff feels that this can be accomplished with a grouping of evergreens at the end of all driveways, perhaps six evergreen trees in the groupings. The developer would also like to create screening for the townhomes from the Holiday Station Store. This will be accomplished by a row of deciduous and evergreen trees along the shared property line of the Holiday Station Store. Currently, there is a row of evergreen trees along that property line, but the developer is willing to add more to increase the screening. There is a bituminous trail with a split-rail fence that currently runs through the middle of this development. It runs from Parkview Lane onto Lower Afton Road. This trail was installed Community Design Review Board Minutes of 06-12-01 -3- during the platting and construction of the adjacent single-family homes to the south. It was developed in order for that neighborhood to gain access to the bus stop and convenience store at the corner of McKnight and Lower Afton Roads. This trail will remain with this development. Originally planned with this development were four turnaround lanes, which were required by the city's fire marshal. After further review, and the fact that the turnarounds would increase impervious surface on the property, it was determined that these tumarounds could better be addressed on the eastern portion of the development by including a 12-foot wide fire lane to wrap around the driveways, as opposed to including the hammerhead type turnarounds. Staff is recommending that the developer install this 12-foot wide fire lane with bituminous paving. The fire lane would be just for emergency vehicles and walking of individuals in the development. Because of the grade on the western portion of the development, a similar type solution could not be accomplished. The fire marshal did state that this fire lane turnaround could be reduced in size from 120-feet to 80-feet in length. Additionally, the width of the turnaround lane can be reduced from 24-feet to 12-feet. In order to ensure access for this development to the bus stop and convenience store at the intersection of McKnight and Lower Afton Roads, staff is also proposing that the developer construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk. Currently there is a concrete sidewalk located in front of the Holiday Station Store, and staff is proposing that the developer continue the sidewalk to most southern end of the development. In addition, to gain access to that corner, staff has proposed an 8-foot wide bituminous trail be constructed from the driveway on the east side of the development to the existing bituminous trail. Lighting on the property will consist of exterior lights above each garage unit. This proposal will ensure that light will not shine into adjacent properties, which was one of the neighbors' main concerns. Staff feels that this plan will offer enough light within the development for security, particularly since Holiday Station Store is so well lit. With that, staff is recommending approval of the proposal and is requesting that the Board make a motion on Item D of staff's recommendations for design review approval with all conditions attached. Board member Shankar asked what the setback from McKnight Road to the building was, and does it meet the setback requirements. Ms. Finwall stated that the setback is 30-fec_.t from McK'nioht Rnnd and it dries c~rrently meet the setback requirement. Board member Shankar stated that the site plan seems to indicate that the building is closer to McKnight Road than the buildings are on Lower Afton Road, which seems to be more than 30- feet. Ms. Finwall stated that was correct. There is approximately a 50ofoot setback from Lower Afton Road on that side of the development. Board member Shankar asked if the elevation that would be seen from the McKnight side would be the side elevation of the building. Ms. Finwall stated that was correct. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 06-12-01 -4- Mr. Tim Thone, the applicant addressed the board. He stated that he concurs with staff's report. He added that the renderings of the Oxford elevation, the buildings on the McKnight side of the development, shows an 8-unit building. However, the proposal is for a 6-unit building. Originally it was proposed for 8-units, but after a neighborhood meeting and meeting with staff, the plan has been changed to 6-units. Also, the renderings of the larger building that is located on Lower Afton Road shows 8-units on each side. This building has been reduced to 7-units on each side; one middle unit on each side of both buildings has been removed. Board member Shankar asked about the four parking stalls off of McKnight. Mr. Thone indicated that two of those parking stalls will be eliminated. He stated that all the units have two-car garages as well as a minimum of 25-foot long driveways. This will allow for parking of four vehicles per unit, which is double the amount required by ordinance. Board member Shankar asked if the 20-foot setback on the east side is the minimum or is there any room to move all the units to the east, away from McKnight Road. Ms. Finwall stated that the 20-foot setback is required for the parking area from adjacent residential property. She stated that Mr. Thone wanted to add the four parking spaces along McKnight Road for guest parking. She also stated that if it is felt that these parking spaces take away from the aesthetics of the development, they could be removed. Chair Ledvina stated that several of the units on the McKnight portion of the development step up as it progresses eastward. He added that the roofline will be broken, adding to the aesthetic of the building. Mr. Thone stated that there would be three breaks, going up 16-inches at each break. Board member Olson stated she felt that was a positive enhancement to the building and asked if the units on Lower Afton Road would also be stepped. Mr. Thone stated that the units on Lower Afton Road would not be stepped because the elevation is very fiat in that area. Board member Shankar stated his concern regarding the elevation of the Oxford units facing McKnight Road. He also stated concern regarding the two parking stalls. He suggested removing the two parking stalls and enhancing the side elevation with additional cultured stone. Chair Ledvina suggested adding a fireplace bumpout to the side elevation of the Oxford similar to the ones on the Bradford units on Lower Afton Road. He felt that addition would improve the appearance of that elevation. Chair Ledvina asked Mr. Thone if it were possible to add that type of fireplace bumpout onto the Oxford's side elevation to breakup the expanse of that area and provide some interesting detail. Board member Olson asked about adding another window to that side elevation on the lower level. Mr. Thone stated that it would be possible to do a bumpout on that side elevation. However, he did not want to make a commitment at this time until having a draftsman look at the plan. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 06-12-01 Board member Shankar asked if additional cultured stone could be added to the proposed fireplace bumpout. Mr. Thone stated that he outlines the bumpouts in the same color as the sofits to bring it out. He also added that he would consider placing a half-round window above the existing window on the side elevation. Chair Ledvina suggested that staff work out the details with the applicant regarding the addition of the fireplace bumpout and some added detail. Mr. Thone stated that there is a significant elevation grade change going from north to south. The building on the north is actually a walk out, which will increase the amount of cultured stone on the bottom by 50%. He stated that those two buildings will look totally different because one is a walk out and one is not. Chair Ledvina stated concern regarding the turnaround for the southwest portion of the site. He feels that the neighbors' concerns relating to tree loss is a valid concern. He stated that in past developments similar to this project did not require this type of turnaround. Ms. Finwall stated that she had discussed the turnaround issue with the city's fire marshal. He stated that the fire code gave the fire marshal the authority to maintain that access as a turnaround or, if need be, he could maintain access on all sides of the buildings. The purpose of the turnaround is to ensure that the large emergency vehicles are able to turn around. Taking the turnaround away would require the emergency vehicles to reverse the large vehicles out of the development, which would be difficult. Chair Ledvina stated that he felt from an aesthetic and design prospective, he feels the turnaround detracts from the site. There is also the issue of the amount of pervious versus impervious surface, loss of trees and screening for the neighbors. Board member Olson stated that according to the existing conditions plan, there is one 26- inch Elm tree in the area of the proposed turnaround. In order to preserve that Elm tree, perhaps the turnaround could be modified. Mr. Thone stated that if the turnaround was totally eliminated, that Elm tree would probably be saved. Additionally, some retaining walls would have to be built. Mr. Ekstrand stated that the grading plan does -'- .... :~"'"" ~ ' o, ,~. a lot cf d,o,,.,, ~,an,.c on thc cast s:dc,.,, both of the buildings on the southerly part of the site. He was not sure if eliminating the turnaround would save the Elm tree, based on the grading plan. Ms. Finwall stated that those buildings will be pushed further to the north by 20-feet, helping save some of the trees in that area. Mr. Ekstrand stated that he agreed with Board member Ledvina's concerns. He stated that the fire marshal has always been very conservative in terms of needing the access. He agrees that it does detract from the site to provide these turnarounds. However, it is hard to argue against public safety. Chair Ledvina stated that the Board is charged with looking at design issues, and he feels that this would be a design recommendation given to the city council and it is their prerogative to add it in. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 06-12-01 Mr. Ekstrand stated that staff could re-investigate this issue and talk with the fire marshal to see if there are other options. Board member Olson stated that she felt we may be negligent if we eliminate the turnaround, forcing the fire trucks to back out of the multi-family units. She felt that if there is no option to save the Elm tree, there should be major effort made to restoring the landscaping in the area. Mr. Thone stated that he is proposing to plant five clusters of evergreens in that area. They will be large spade Scotch Pines. Chair Ledvina suggested that we perhaps enhance the landscaping on the southwest portion of this site in the vicinity of the parking areas, softening the view of the parking area from McKnight Road. Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date stamped May 11, 2001 for Afton Ridge Townhomes based on the findings required by code. The developer, Tim Thone, 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: a. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval that incorporates the following details: (1) Location of all existing trees on the site to be preserved. (2) All replacement deciduous trees shall be at least two and one half (2-1/2) inches in diameter, balled and burlapped. (3) A continuous row of 8-foot high evergreens to be installed along or near the shared property line of the Holiday Station Store. (4) Four groupings of 6-foot high or larger evergreen trees to be installed at the ends of the driveways. (5) Planting beds to be i~,si.~ilud i,~ belwu~ lhu d, iwway~, ;,, ;',u~-,;. of i;-,e entrance doors, to include Iow maintenance shrubs and perennials that are mulched and edged. (6) An underground lawn irrigation system. (7) Design of wetland buffer signs that are required to be installed at wetland buffer line to state: Wetland Buffer - no mowing, cutting, filling, or dumping. (8) Plantings within the wetland buffer to include native plants. (9) In addition to the above, all common grounds shall be sodded (except for mulched and edged planting beds and wetland buffer). Community Design Review Board Minutes of 06-12-01 b. Present a color scheme to staff for approval of each building. c. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction and have each building staked by a registered land surveyor. 3. Complete the following before occupying each building: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. b. Complete all landscaping for the development, including tree replacement, mulched and edged planting beds, wetland buffer plantings and sod. c. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. d. Install address signs at both driveway entrances and above each unit. e. Install wetland buffer signs that prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling, or dumping with the buffer. f. Remove all unneeded silt fence from the site. g. There shall be no parking on the 24-foot wide private drives. The developer shall post the drives with no parking signs. h. There shall be no parking on the fire lane turn-around. The developer shall post the lane with no parking/fire lane signs. i. There shall be no driving or parking on the 12-foot wide fire lane. The developer shall post the lane with fire lane signs and install a fall-down bollard at the entrance of each side of the lane. j. Install stop signs at both driveway exits. k. The turnarounds for fire trucks at the end of the Oxford units be eliminated. 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 I 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. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 06-12-01 -8- The applicant shall submit to the staff for review revised west elevations of the Oxford units. The revised elevations shall show both the north and the south unit, showing the difference. The elevation shall incorporate a fireplace bumpout feature similar to the north side of the Bradford and Camelot elevations. Board member Johnson seconded the motion. Ayes - All Motion carries. This proposal goes before the city council on June 25, 2001. b. Outdoor Lighting Code Amendment. Mr. Ekstrand gave the staff presentation. He stated that this item has been before the Board on a few occasions, the last being January 9, 2001. The Board and staff had discussed possible changes to the city's Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. These changes were prompted by Ms. Tina Thevenin's presentation last summer. She presented her ideas and thoughts on proper outdoor lighting, what the ordinance should include, problems with lighting, the purpose of lighting, and the aspects of good lighting. The Board at that time had directed staff to take a closer look at the City of Maplewood's code. One directive was to come up with a purpose and intent section of the ordinance to guide developers and explain clearly what the city's intent for outdoor lighting is. Staff has also included in the proposal a section to address single-family lighting, which can also be a nuisance. He stated that the proposed ordinance is much more descriptive, it elaborates on elements such as recreational lighting, light pole height, more specifics on photometric plan, specifically stating what elements need to be included in such a plan. Also discussed was control of glare, light trespass onto adjacent properties, nuisance lighting in single-dwelling neighborhoods, and grandfathering in existing lights. One significant change recommended is to make the maximum light intensity not to exceed .4 foot candles of light intensity at a residential lot line and also use that recommendation for other properties, such as commercial to commercial. Mr. Ekstrand stated that he did check with the Parks & Rec director to see if the proposal for lighti ":'~ ....... ' '~ ~' ........ , ^~ ,:~ ^~ recreational n§ is sensible. He did concur, ,he ..... ~ .............. - ........... ~, .... p.m., unless there is some event where the Council might clearly say lights may stay on beyond 10:30 p.m. Mr. Ekstrand stated that he spoke with a former Board Member, Mike Holder, who is working in the lighting industry. Mr. Holder did not have any comments on the proposed ordinance, however he did say to watch out for controlling of light glare. He also suggested not getting into a lumen rating, with the changing in bulb intensity, it is very hard to govern. He suggested staying with a measurement of foot-candles. At this point the Board discussed various aspects of the proposed Lighting Ordinance. Mr. Ekstrand stated that staff would continue looking at different aspects of monitoring lighting, such as total illumination from a particular site. However, he is concerned about enforcement of that type of monitoring. Board member Jorgenson described what the term .4 foot candle light is. He stated that it is the amount of light emitted off a candle at a foot distance. He also stated that it is Community Design Review Board Minutes of 06-12-01 -9- hard to regulate lumen because lumen changes based on the duration that the bulb is on. Chair Ledvina asked for more information about possibly incorporating a standard for total allowable illuminations. Mr. Ekstrand stated that staff will research the topic further. Board member Shankar moved to table the Outdoor Lighting Code Amendment. Board member Jorgenson seconded the motion. Ayes - All Chair Ledvina stated that there is no rush on bringing this item back to the Board for their review. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS VIII. There were no visitors present. BOARD PRESENTATIONS Board member Olson reported on the June 11, 2001 City Council meeting. She stated the only CDRB issue before the Council was the Garden's development. She stated that the hottest issue of the evening was in regards to the proposed path through the development and the adjacent neighborhood. There was a petition presented by the residents, 21 of the 26 residents on the cul-de-sac on Ripley Avenue were opposed to the path. City Council did not pass the trail portion of the development. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Mr. Ekstrand requested a CDRB representative for the June 25th City Council Meeting, Mr. Thone's proposal will be on that agenda. Board member Johnson volunteered for this meeting. Mr. Ekstrand also asked for a CDRB representative for the July 9th City Council meeting, Chair Ledvina volunteered for this meeting. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:26 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Design Review - 3M Leadership Development Institute (Building #255) 600 Carlton Street July 3, 2001 INTRODUCTION John Olfelt, of 3M Company, is proposing to make exterior building and landscaping improvements to 3M Company's Leadership Development Institute located at 600 Carlton Street. Refer to the maps on pages 3-6. Mr. Olfelt is proposing to do the following: Refurbish the building exterior by covering the existing precast-concrete exterior with brick, metal panels and a standing-seam roof. The applicant is proposing to apply this new exterior on the north, west and east sides. The applicant would wrap the new exterior treatment around onto the south elevation about 10 feet from the east and west elevations. The majority of the south elevation would remain as is (precast concrete panels) but would be painted to match the proposed metal panels. The applicant is not proposing a full retreatment of the south elevation since trees hide this side of the building. The applicant would also add a canopy over the walkway at the northeast comer of the building to cover the main entrance as well as make some window changes. Refer to the building elevations. Add landscaping on the front (west) and back (east) of the building. The applicant proposes to plant locust trees and several spirea bushes on the west side of the building. They would plant crab trees and spirea bushes on the east side. Refer to the landscape plan. 3. Lower the height of the light poles in the parking lot from 30 feet to 20 feet and increase the lamp wattage from 400 watts to 800 watts for better security. The building interior would remain a training facility, but will be remodeled to accommodate executive staff rather than technical staff. BACKGROUND Past Actions February 25, 1991: The city council granted a conditional Use permit (CUP) to allow the training facility subject to seven conditions. May 13, 1991: The council vacated part of a utility easement that ran under a comer of the building. May 28, 1991: The council amended the site plan allowing two ground-mounted and two wall- mounted antennas. March 23, 1992: The council extended this CUP for five years. April 14, 1997: The council reviewed the CUP and moved to review it again only if a problem develops or if the owner proposes to change the site plan. DISCUSSION Building and Landscape Design The proposed building exterior and landscaping improvements are attractive enhancements that will benefit the neighborhood and 3M's campus. Staff would normally prefer to see a visible elevation, like the south elevation, treated as the other three. In this case, however, the south elevation is quite screened by trees as the applicant stated. Furthermore, even if the trees did not remain, the applicant is still improving the building appearance substantially over its current state. Staff, therefore, is happy with the proposed improvements. Lighting Changes The applicant's proposed lighting changes would lessen the light spread onto the residential lots to the east. The proposed lighting plan, however, shows an anticipated light intensity of .5 footcandles at the residential lot line. The city code requires a maximum of .4 footcandles. The applicant should revise their plan to meet this requirement. RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans date-stamped June 25, 2001 for the building extedor and landscape plan changes at 3M Building #255, 600 Cadton Street. Approval is based on the findings required by the code and subject to the applicant submitting a revised lighting plan for staff approval showing a maximum light spread to the abutting residential lot lines of .4 footcandles. The applicant shall submit this plan before obtaining a building permit. ?mc~ des.doc (Section 36-29) Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Neighborhood Map 4. Site Plan/Landscape Plan 5. Existing Lighting Plan 6. Proposed Lighting Plan 7. Building Elevations (north and west) 8. Building Elevations (south and east) 9. Plans date-stamped June 25, 2001 (separate attachment) 2 $?. AVE. Attachment 1 Lake Attachment 2 m&mmmm ! 3M BUILDING #255: ~Z Z Z - x I · r .~.; ,, I'... · I ~,~1 ,:,~ ,9.0 '1 " I 4 KINDERBERRY ~,.° DAY CARE CEN.T. ER Attachment sIS ~I0 FREMONT. AVE A VENUE N -- ................. ~. ....... ;:. ........ CONWAY AVENUE ....... .: ................... : ......... ~'o~~t r,~r,~ .................. :: .............. ~~ ........ : : -~ ~ ~/~, ,~ f~ 3MU 3M NEIGHBORHOOD MAP Attachment 4 . ~ Attachment 5 Il Attachment 6 0 0 c' 0 c' JJ~J jj-- J 8 Attachment 7 Attachment 8 10 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Design Review Dean's Tavern Additions 1986 Rice Street July 3, 2001 INTRODUCTION Project Description Paul Mateyka, of Dean's Tavern, is proposing to build a 1,353-square-foot customer-seating-area addition and a 120-square-foot kitchen addition on the south side of his building at 1986 Rice Street. (See the maps on pages six through eight). The building exterior of the proposed additions would be horizontal-lap siding to match the existing building. The applicant also would add a vinyl awning that would match the awning on the existing building. The plans also show a future deck on the south side of the building. (See the plans on pages eight and nine and the separate attachment.) Request The applicant is requesting city approval of the building design, parking lot and site plans. BACKGROUND On October 22, 1985, the CDRB approved plans for an addition to Dean's Tavern. This approval was subject to 13 conditions. However, the owner did not proceed with this project. DISCUSSION Pavement Setbacks City code requires that paved areas be set back 15 feet from street right-of-ways. Currently, the applicant's parking lot extends into the Rice Street right-of-way about twelve feet. The applicant proposes to pave the gravel parking area with bituminous and patch, seal coat and restripe the existing pavement. Staff does not object to leaving the pavement in its present location because of th~_ wide Rice Street right-of-way. The app!icent is aware that they would have to increa? their parking lot setback if Rice Street is ever widened. Building Design The design and extedor of the proposed addition are acceptable since it would match the existing building. The existing building has an exterior of horizontal siding with an upper railing of painted cedar with wood brackets. Parking There is enough parking available on the site to meet code requirements. With the proposed addition, Dean's Tavern would need 44 spaces according to the code. After the expansion and parking lot improvements, the applicant would have 53 spaces. The required pa~king takes into account parking for employees, customers and the amount of public space in the building, including the future deck. Site Lights The code requires that new site lights be designed or aimed so that they do not shine into any neighbors' windows or onto a public street. The applicant should submit a photometric plan if they would install any new site lights that would shine toward the residential neighbors. Screening Since the applicant is proposing to improve the north part of the parking lot, it is important that Dean's provide screening from their parking lot to the existing house to the north. This screening may be accomplished with a privacy fence, landscaping or a combination of these. The plans for this screening should be approved by city staff before the city approves the project building permit. Landscaping The proposed plans show a new planting bed along the front of the addition that would have spirea and wood mulch and the planting of three additional shrubs on the southwest corner of the parking lot. The applicant, however, is not proposing to plant any new trees with this project. They are proposing to keep the existing trees on the south side of the building. There is room along the north and east sides of the parking lot and on the southwest corner of the addition for the applicant to plant trees. Such trees should be a mix of species and should be hearty for extreme conditions. RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans date-stamped June 21, 2001, for the expansion of Dean's Tavern, 1986 Rice Street. The owner shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Submit the following for staff approval before the city issues a building permit: a. Grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans. b. Plans for the design and placement of the trash enclosure. The trash enclosure shall be large enough for refuse containers and any recycling containers the a.oplicant mav use. The trash enclosure shall have gates that are 100 percent opaque and extend to the ground. c. A photometric-lighting plan if there would be any new site lights installed. This plan shall meet the standards of the city lighting code. d. A revised landscaping and screening plan that shows screening along the north side of the parking lot. This screening should include a privacy fence, landscaping or a combination of these. (code requirement) The code allows the CDRB to waive this requirement if they decide that the screening is not needed or if it would not protect surrounding property values. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. b. Install reflectorized stop signs at all exits and a handicap-parking sign for the handicap-parking spaces. c. The site lights shall not exceed the maximum light intensity required by code. Aim or shield any new site lights so they are not a nuisance to neighbors. Paint any new roof-top mechanical equipment that may be placed on the proposed addition. Paint must match the color of the building. Any new roof-mounted equipment visible to adjacent residential property shall be screened. e. The exterior materials and color of the additions shall match the existing building. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure for any outside trash containers. The enclosures must be 100 percent opaque, match the color of the building and have a closeable gate that extends to the ground. (code requirement) 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The city receives cash escrow 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. The location of the future deck is approved. The deck design, however, shall be subject to staff approval. The owner shall provide fencing around the perimeter of the deck subject to the requirements of the Police Chief. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development or the assistant community development director may approve minor changes. REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 35,284 square feet (.81 acres) Existing land use: Dean's Tavern SURROUNDING LAND USES North: A single-family home that the city has planned and zoned BC (business commercial) South: Zittel Greenhouses West: Businesses across Rice Street in Roseville East: Ponding area PAST ACTION On October 14, 1976, the city council approved plans for an exterior building remodeling of Dean's Tavern. This approval was subject to six conditions of approval. PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: BC (business commercial) Zoning: BC Code Requirements Section 36-17(h) allows the expansion of a nonconforming structure or parking lot if the expansion would meet the minimum setbacks required by this chapter or the setbacks of the existing structure, whichever is less. Ordinance Requirements Section 25-70 of the city code requires that the CDRB make the following findings to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. 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 esthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. Application Date we received this application on June 21, 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 August 20, 2001. p:sec18\deans.des Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Building Elevations 5. Plans date-stamped June 21, 2001 (separate attachment) Attachment 1 2400N ! PLAZ~ CJR 2 ALVAR~DO DR 3 BELLECR[ST DR ,I DEAL/VILLE DR $ UERJDiAH DR Z L~J RD B2 COUNTY LI'FrLE CANADA RD. B SKILLMAN AVE. MT. VERNON AVE. FENTOi KINGSTON LOCATION J BELMONT ehrline ROSELAWN AVE. E,~gert~ Park AVE. LWOOD AVE, RIPLEY ,,,VE.)~ ~11 Il ST. PAUL MAP BELMONT BELLWOOD Z 6 Attachment 2 2000 DEAN'S TAVERN r-, ZITTEL GREENHOUSES / / 7 Attachment 3 SITE PLAN 8 Attachment 4 ]~1]