Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/14/2002BOOK AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD May 14, 2002 6:00 P.M. Maplewood City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 10. Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Agenda Approval of the March 12, 2002 Minutes Unfinished Business: None Scheduled Design Review: a. Kline Nissan Automobile Dealership - 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive b. 3M Building #277 - Conway Avenue East of McKnight Road Visitor Presentations Board Presentations Staff Presentations: a. Second City Council Meeting in May Rescheduled to May 28, 2002 (Tuesday) - Relocate May 28 CDRB Meeting to Maplewood Room b. Interview of Applicants for CDRB Membership Adjourn WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD This outline has been prepared to explain the review process of this meeting. The review of an item usually follows this format. 1. The chairperson of the meeting will announce the item to be reviewed. The chairperson will ask the applicant or developer of the project up to the podium to respond to the staff's recommendation regarding the proposal. The Community Design Review Board will then discuss the proposed project with the applicant. The chairperson will then ask the audience if there is anyone present who wishes to comment on the proposal. After everyone is the audience wishing to speak has given his or her comments, the chairperson will close the public discussion portion of the meeting. The Board will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. The Board will then make its recommendations or decision. Most decisions by the Board are final, unless appealed to the City Council. You must notify the City staff in writing within 15 days to register an appeal. jw\forms\cdrb.agd Revised: 11-09-94 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 2002 II. III. IV. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Matt Ledvina Craig Jorgenson Linda Olson Ananth Shankar Staff Present: Recording Secretary: APPROVAL OF AGENDA Present Present Present Absent Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Lisa Kroll Board member Jorgenson moved approval of the agenda. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes ---Jorgenson, Ledvina, Olson The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the February 12, 2002, minutes. Board member Jorgenson moved approval of the minutes of February 12, 2002. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes -Jorgenson, Ledvina, Olson Approval of the February 26, 2002, minutes. Board member Olson moved approval of the minutes of February 26, 2002. Board member Jorgenson seconded. Ayes -Jorgenson, Ledvina, Olson The motion passed. Community Design Review Board Minutes 03-12-2002 V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Hillcrest Animal Hospital (1320 County Road D) Ms. Finwall stated that Dr. Jennifer Bouthilet, representing the Hillcrest Animal Hospital, is proposing to build a 7,000 square-foot animal hospital at the southwest corner of Highway 61 and County Road D. This proposal includes constructing a new animal hospital to replace the current animal hospital and a former house on the site. Specifically, the owners recently demolished a house on the property, will construct the new hospital (if approved), and then will demolish the existing hospital after completing the new hospital. The applicant is requesting approval of the following: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) to build the new building closer than 350 feet to a residential zoning district. The nearest residential district is immediately to the west of the site. The proposed building would be 229 feet from the west property line of the site. 2. Approval of site, landscape and architectural plans. Ms. Finwall said the proposed building also would be 300 feet from the nearest house to the west. The proposed future addition would be 256 feet from this house. The planning commission recommended approval of the CUP at their March 4, 2002, meeting. The community design review board should act on the design aspect listed as item B. numbers I through 8 as outlined in the staff report. Ms. Finwall stated the proposed building would be attractive and would have decorative rock-faced block, stucco and asphalt shingles. The proposed colors are brown, cream and beige. As proposed, the building would fit the character of this highway-frontage business location. The proposed site plan shows a future addition on the west side of the hospital building. The location of the addition should not cause any problems. In fact, the proposed future addition would be farther east than the existing animal hospital. The design of the addition, however, should be reviewed by the city before the city approves a building permit for the addition. The proposed landscaping west of the parking lot and driveway is a good start, but the owner should develop this plan further. The city code requires that the Community Design Review Board Minutes 03-12-2002 developer screen the parking lot from the home to the west by a six-foot-tall, 80 percent opaque screen. The owner may accomplish this screening by berming, fencing, plantings or a combination of these. As proposed, the plan does not meet the code requirement for screening. As such, the applicant should expand the landscape plan to meet this code requirement. If the applicant wants to use trees to meet the screening requirement, the trees should include six-foot-tall Austrian Pines, Black Hills Spruce or a combination of these or other similar species of trees. Ms. Finwall said the applicant has not proposed any plantings on the north or east sides of the building. In addition, the proposed plans show a dog run on the north side of the building. The applicant should further develop the landscape plan for these parts of the site by adding no-maintenance plantings on the north and east sides of the building. These plantings also should include provisions for screening the dog run from views to the north and west with opaque fencing or trees. There is a house on the Sparkle Auto property to the south. The city code, however, does not require screening on this side of the site since the city has planned and zoned this property light manufacturing. Ms. Finwall said with the County Road D realignment proposal this portion of County Road D may be a cul-de-sac at this point which will make the north elevation less visible to passing vehicles. The applicant should provide a lighting plan indicating the light spread and fixture design. The lighting code requires a plan when near homes. The fixtures installed should be a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. A retaining wall is also proposed along the east side of the parking lot and a four- foot high fence is also proposed above the retaining wall. This retaining wall is up to 12 feet in height, although the applicant states this retaining wall may be modified to create a stepping of this wall which staff does feels is a good idea. Staff suggests the wall be no more than four feet in height and is landscaped. Because the landscape plan is incomplete at this time staff recommends the applicant submit a revised landscape plan for the community design review board approval. This plan should include additional landscaping on the north and east sides of the building and code required screening on the west side of the parking lot and driveway. Board member OIson is curious about the signage and the elevations. She asked if the south elevation is going to be the entrance and the exits? And she asked if the signage is going to be on the east side? The parking is basically going to be on the south and west side? Community Design Review Board Minutes 03-12-2002 4 Ms. Finwall said yes that is correct. The signage proposed would require a separate sign permit but the signage is intended to face Highway 61 on the east elevation. Board member Olson asked if there are going to be any freestanding signs? Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Paul Meyer of Paul Meyer Architects addressed the board. Dr. Jennifer Bouthilet the owner of the Hillcrest Animal Hospital addressed the board. Mr. Meyer said the signage proposed is on the east side because that is the highway frontage to Highway 61 and there will be signs on the south side and at each of the entry points to the building. He said regarding monument or freestanding signs, there is an existing sign that is along the frontage road. There is also an existing sign that the applicant would be looking to replace at the north driveway entrance. Board member Olson said the north side is blank with no signage or indication of what is there. Mr. Meyer said the site is very elevated and there is a lot of established growth on the hill. The applicant is trying to blend the building in with the natural setting. He said there really isn't any exposure to the people passing on County Road D on the north elevation because of the elevation and natural growth. Board member Olson asked if they are going to be digging into the elevation and removing vegetation for the dog run? Mr. Meyer said they wouldn't be effecting 'the established vegetation. There is about 20 feet of rise up to the site from the street, so if you are driving you really need to look up to see the building. Board member Jorgenson said he perceives that when one drives by the site they will be mostly seeing the roofline of the building on the north side. Mr. Meyer said yes and that is why there is really no advantage to having signage on that side other than the monument side. Board member Jorgenson said the building is back a ways and you have the sign that draws you to it but if you drive too fast you will miss the building passing up County Road D from Highway 61. Community Design Review Board .5 Minutes 03-12-2002 Mr. Meyer said part of the goal is to loCate the building to the east so the building itself is visible. The applicant is moving the building away from the residential district over 100 feet further. Part of the reason the driveway is curbed the way it is is to save the majority of the trees that are on site. Mr. Meyer said the site plan is really laid out quite well to save the beautiful trees. The request to have more plantings on the north side will not really enhance the area. Board member Olson said she was just curious how the grading plan and the dog run incorporated would lay out with it running so close to County Road D. She would imagine that there is going to be a real steep grade there. Mr. Meyer said not at the dog run. At the edge of the dog run and down there will be a steep grade. Board member Olson asked if the dog run would be concrete? Mr. Meyer said it is a peat gravel surface with a fence enclosure. Board member Olson asked if the dog run would run the whole length of the building? Mr. Meyer said the site plan indicates that the dog run is 8 X 8 feet. Dr. Bouthilet said the purpose of the dog run is to take the dogs out to go to the bathroom a few times a day while their runs inside are being cleaned. When they are outside they are out there for a temporary basis. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant if they had samples of the materials to be used for this project? Mr. Meyer brought a sample board to show board members of the different products and colors that will be used. Chairperson Ledvina said he had a question regarding the retaining wall. He wonders what the views are of the applicant regarding the retaining wall. This will be a major site feature as it relates to the appearance along Highway 61. Mr. Meyer said in order to achieve what the applicant wanted to do with the site the improvements were integrated as much as they could with the existing trees because there are some significant trees. In terms of the location of the building they really needed the retaining wall on this portion of the site because if they came to the south side of the site the parking really didn't lay in well because of the north slope. To actually use the site appropriately they wanted to move the building as far to the east as possible. But in order for the property to drain properly, they needed to have the parking lot higher than they wanted it to be just so it tied in with the trees on the south side of the property. Community Design Review Board Minutes 03-12-2002 Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Meyer if the entire wall would be 12-feet high? Mr. Meyer said not for the entire length. The contours slope into it. A portion of that will be screened by the trees that are remaining in that area and along the south elevation it will be sloping back to zero. The concern at stepping the retaining wall at four-foot intervals is with each of those intervals it takes two or three feet more property. If you take the wall farther to the east to accomplish the stepping, the wall actually becomes higher because you are going father down the hill and you also encroach into the next tree that they would like to save. Chairperson Ledvina said he still has a concern about a 12-foot high retaining wall and how that will appear. Board member Olson asked Mr. Meyer what type of block they are going proposing for the retaining wall? Mr. Meyer said it will be a modular block and the color will be similar to the building colors. Board member Olson asked if they are using Anchor or Keystone blocks? Mr. Meyer said they have not selected that yet. It will probably not be a Keystone block because they are about 85 pounds apiece. Board member Olson stated that at recent meeting at work she learned that when building retaining walls it is important to check the imperviousness of the concrete to ensure that it has freeze/thaw factor variability. She said they are finding that a lot of retaining walls are failing after 15 years so that is just a caution she would like to pass onto the applicant. Mr. Meyer said he understands that 10 to 15 years ago there was some really poorly designed retaining walls. With today's technology they are finding out more about the soil pressures and which products work best. As the design professional Mr. Meyer is very sensitive to those facts. Because the parking lot is located so close to the wall, it will also add a surcharge load onto the wall. Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Meyer if he had any concerns regarding the staff report in terms of the conditions that were outlined? Mr. Meyer said a concern of his was providing additional landscaping to the north side. On the west side of the property they proposed to have a row of evergreen trees and a row of deciduous trees and they thought that was superior to putting two rows of evergreen trees on the west property line. Staff did not disagree with that but they had to report the non-compliance with the ordinance in terms of the Community Design Review Board 7 Minutes 03-12-2002 screening requirements. There hasn't been any screening on that part of the property. The replacement trees are on that side and they thought from a design standpoint that mixing the types of trees was beneficial. The second component to that is the uncertainty of what alignment County Road D will have on the west side of the property in terms of the screening requirements. Board member Olson said she prefers the combination of evergreen trees and deciduous trees for screening. Board member Jorgenson asked Mr. Meyer what the time line for the future expansion to the west is? Mr. Meyer said an optimistic timeline is two years. A realistic timeline is more than two years but that all depends on how things go. Dr. Bouthilet said it would also depend on how well the business handles the new mortgage payment. Chairperson Ledvina said he is very concerned about the 12-foot retaining wall. He believes it needs to be broken up into sections. He is not sure how it can be designed but he has very strong feelings about a continuous retaining wall that high. He thinks the design of the building, the materials, the color schemes, and the parking lot will be a very nice, but he has concerns about the retaining wall. Mr. Meyer asked what types of plantings would be required above the stepped retaining wall? Chairperson Ledvina said he would recommend something like evergreen bushes that would look nice for the full four seasons. Mr. Meyer said the applicant would prefer to put a wildflower mix in there to tie in with the north side of the building. Chairperson Ledvina said he would prefer some kind of evergreen bushes because the wildflowers are going to die and then the sections will have nothing alive above them. Dr. Bouthilet asked if they could have something that would climb up the wall? Chairperson Ledvina said that would only get you through two seasons. In winter that will not be visible and he really believes it will look better with evergreen bushes, it will be visible from the road and it will look nicer. He thinks the landscape plan needs to be brought back to the community design review board with revisions. At first he thought it could be done on the staff level but he believes it should be revised and brought back to members because of the details of the retaining wall and landscaping. Community Design Review Board Minutes 03-12-2002 Board member Jorgenson said he would feel better about the west elevation being so plain if he knew when the addition would be built. It may be two years or it could be ten years before the addition takes place. Dr. Bouthilet said it is plain but there is a huge silver maple tree that is tall and wide and you will hardly notice the whole expanse of the wall that was mentioned. Board member Jorgenson moved to approve the plans date-stamped February 12, 2002, for the proposed Hillcrest Animal Hospital at 1320 County Road D. The owner shall do the following: (CDRB changes to the recommendations are underlined). 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: ao Grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans. The plans shall meet all the requirements of the city engineer. The utility plans shall provide a fire hydrant where the new driveway of the hospital meets County Road D. bo A site lighting plan showing the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the residents. 3. Submit revised plans for CDRB approval as follows: The landscape plan shall include additional landscaping on the north and the east sides of the building ('especially in front of the doq run) and the code-required screening on the west side of the parking lot and driveway. The retainin.q wall plan shall include the retainin.q wall shown with ~ minimum of a two-foot step or breakinq in tiers with landscapin.q located above the tiers. Any wall that is more than four feet tall requires a buildinq permit issued by the city. 4. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. b. Install a handicap-parking sign for the handicap-parking space. c. Install and maintain an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas. Community Design Review Board Minutes 03-12-2002 VII. VIII. IX. d. Stripe all customer parking spaces at a width of 92 feet and the employee spaces at 9 feet. 5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The city receives 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. 6. Signs are not part of this approval. The applicant shall apply for sign permits with staff. This design approval does not include the future addition on the west side of the hospital. This addition must be approved by the city before the city issues a building permit for the addition. 8. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes- Jorgenson, Ledvina, Olson The motion passed. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. BOARD PRESENTATIONS Board member Olson was the representative at the city council meeting on March 11, 2002. She discussed the drainage issues at Maplewood Toyota, St. Jerome's Catholic school, and the CDRB Annual Report that was presented to the city council by her at the meeting. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Community Design Review Board Minutes 03-12-2002 ]0 Community Design Review Board Representation at the March 25, 2002, city council meeting. Board member Jorgenson will be the representative if it is possible, otherwise, Board member Olson will volunteer. Items to be reviewed will be the Hillcrest Animal Hospital and Lighting Ordinance. b. Community Design Review Board Vacancy Update. Ms. Finwall stated that the city council appointed Jackie Monahan-Junek for the planning commission vacancy. Staff will contact the remaining candidates to see if they are interested in interviewing for the CDRB vacancy. Ms. Finwall will schedule interviews with all interested candidates for a CDRB meeting in April. Board member Jorgenson asked what the procedure is when appointing someone? He said members saw that the planning commission recommended someone for the position, and then the city council picked another candidate. It seems that the city council didn't take into account what the planning commission recommended. If the planning commission and CDRB are supposed to be representing the people, but then the city council hand selects someone they want anyway, it almost seems like they don't value the planning commission's or the CDRB's decisions. Board member Olson said once again the first choice of the members was passed for another member the city council wanted instead of who the board wanted. The candidate that did not get selected is understandably very unhappy with the City of Maplewood because this is the third time she was not selected for a committee. Chairperson Ledvina said it was his recommendation that the board have a formal vote where the board's input would be heard. It is 100% of the city council's discretion. Board member Jorgenson said in a sense it is a waste of the board's time to go to the trouble of interviewing a candidate and give input and vote only to have the city council go and select someone else and gloss over any recommendation that any of the boards might recommend. Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Jorgenson if he would like to make a motion that the boards should not interview candidates and the. city council do all the interviewing since they are doing the selecting on their own anyway? Board member Olson asked the chair if that was even an option? Board member Jorgenson said he would take it upon himself to see how other communities deal with the voting process for members. Community Design Review Board Minutes 03-12-2002 ]! Board member OIson said she would consider making a motion to incorporate into the next set of minutes after interviewing the candidates in order to send a message to the city council that they not ignore the board's recommendation. One of the reasons is that if a candidate is the best candidate the board would like to have that person on their team. It made her feel very funny at the city council meeting that a person that had to have her arm twisted to be back in the running for a planning commission spot was selected instead of the commission's first choice. Chairperson Ledvina said he thinks Mr. Jorgenson stated it correctly when he said the members might be wasting their time and the candidate's time when the members don't really make up a solid piece of the selection process. He is not saying to turn it over to the board and let them select their own members, but if the board doesn't have any kind of significant input then why bother. Ms. Finwall said she is new to this process and suggested that she review the selection process and will bring back suggestions to the board prior to interviewing for the existing CDRB vacancy. c. Sign Ordinance Discussion. Chairperson Ledvina said that a good starting point to revising the city's sign code would be to create a mission statement for the sign code. Ms. Finwall agreed to work on a mission statement as well as compile several other cities' sign codes and put together a table comparing them to the City of Maplewood's sign code. The CDRB plans on reviewing possible changes to the city's sign code throughout the year. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:38 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Kline Nissan Dealership- Wetland Buffer Variance, Conditional Use Permit and Design Review 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive May 8, 2002 INTRODUCTION Project Description Rick Kline, of Kline Auto World, is proposing to build a 25,502-square-foot, two-story Nissan dealership with a 16-bay automobile maintenance garage. The dealership will be constructed at 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive, which are located at the southeast corner of County Road D and Maplewood Drive (Highway 61). The site is zoned M-l, Light Manufacturing, and currently contains two vacant single-family homes. Refer to plans on pages 12 through 21. Requests The applicant is requesting that the city council approve: 1. A 75-foot-wide wetland buffer variance. The RamseyANashington Metro Watershed District has classified the wetland on the site as a Class 1 wetland. City code requires a 100- foot-wide wetland buffer along Class 1 wetlands. The applicant is proposing a 25-foot- wide wetland buffer. 2. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a maintenance garage. The sale of new and used vehicles is permitted. City code requires a CUP for service and maintenance garages. 3. Design review (architectural, site, landscape, and lighting plans). DISCUSSION Wetland Buffer Variance Watershed District Approval A wetland delineation was performed for the Nissan dealership by Advanced Soils and Engineering· The watershed district also conducted a delineation of this wetland approximately four years ago during a watershed project, and they confer with the submitted delineated marks· After inspection of the wetland, Karl Hammers of the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, stated that grading and filling of the wetland buffer have left parts of the buffer degraded· In addition, some of the buffer has been overrun by green ash and buckthorn. Rob Langer, also of the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, stated that even though some of the buffer has been degraded, the wetland is a high quality Class I wetland, particularly the flood plain wetland to the east of the property. It is beneficial to maintain as much of the surrounding buffer as possible. The applicant proposes to grade up to the wetland edge and to reestablish an "~mproved' 25-foot-wide wetland buffer. The parking lot will be constructed 25 feet from the wetland's edge. The applicant is working with Sunde Engineering to design and install a subsurface storm water infiltration system that will help treat the water prior to being deposited into the wetland. This type of system was also installed at the Volvo dealership located to the south of the Nissan site. On April 4, 2002, the RamseyNVashington Metro Watershed District approved the Kline Nissan dealership proposal. The watershed district requires only a 75-foot-wide wetland buffer for Class 1 wetlands, as opposed to the city's required 100-foot-wide buffer. Therefore, the watershed district approved a 50-foot-wide wetland buffer variance that allows the applicant to remove the entire buffer and to provide an "improved" 25-foot-wide buffer with reestablished native vegetation once the subsurface storm water infiltration system is installed. Refer to watershed district approval on pages 22 and 23. Previously Approved Wetland Buffer Variances October 11, 1999: The city council approved a 75-foot-wide wetland buffer setback variance for the Volvo dealership on Highway 61, located directly to the south of the Nissan site. City code required a 100-foot-wide buffer. Volvo was required to install a subsurface storm water infiltration system and plant native vegetation in the 25-foot-wide buffer. December 9, 1996: The city council approved a 60~foot-wide wetland buffer setback variance for the Winiecki building located at 1420 County Road D, on the east side of the wetland east of the Nissan site. City code required a 100-foot-wide buffer. February 26, 1996: The city council approved a 75-foot-wide wetland buffer setback variance for the Lexus dealership on HighwaY 61, located directly south of the Volvo dealership. City code required a 100-foot-wide buffer. Lexus was required to plant native vegetation in the 25-foot- wide buffer. Comparison of Dealerships with Wetland Buffer Variances DEALERSHIP LOT SIZE BLDG SIZE Lexus 3.62 acres 14,074 s.f. (one story) Volvo 2.32 acres 14,778 s.f. (one story) PARKING 176 WETLAND BUFFER 25-foot 88 25-foot Nissan 4.71 acres 25,502 s.f. 269 25-foot (Proposed) (two story) (Note: The Lexus building is currently 11,000 square feet in size. They are proposing, however, to add on and increase their square footage to 14,074 square feet.) 2 Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 Variance Concerns The wetland on the proposed Nissan site, a Class 1 wetland, has characteristics and functions that are most susceptible to human impacts; they are the most unique type of wetland and have the highest community resource significance. The 100-foot-wide wetland buffer is required to help protect the wetland from human impact. The applicant's estimate of hardship for the 75-foot-wide wetland buffer variance is that the site has wetlands located on two sides of the property and that without the variance to construct the parking lot within 25 feet of the wetland the site would be deemed unusable for their intentions of constructing a new dealership (refer to the attached hardship justification letter on page 24). Regarding compliance with state law findings for variance approval, staff agrees that the site might be difficult to develop because of the wetlands, however, staff does not feel that the wetlands pose a sufficient hardship to warrant the extreme 75-foot-wide wetland buffer variance requested. To demonstrate this, staff has shown on page 25 the remaining land available for development with various wetland buffer setbacks. Clearly with no variance a 100-foot-wide wetland buffer would render over half of the site unusable. The 50-foot-wide buffer, however, would allow considerably more land area to be used by the applicant. Therefore, after much debate, staff has determined that preserving more of the natural wetland buffer along the northeast side of the property would be a suitable compromise, especially since the watershed district indicated that the flood plain wetland to the east is particularly sensitive. Allowing the proposed 25-foot-wide wetland buffer on the east and south would preserve much of the applicant's site plan and cause the least disruption to the parking and traffic patterns as proposed. Mr. Hammers of the Watershed District stated that if the city requires a 50-foot-wide buffer, it would be beneficial to grade within 10 feet of the wetland and reestablish 40 feet of the buffer with native plantings. He said that the additional improved buffer would help protect the wetland. On May 6, 2002, the planning commission recommended approval of Nissan's proposed conditional use permit and wetland buffer variance with the condition that Nissan maintain a 50- foot-wide wetland buffer along the northeast portion of the site as recommended by staff. At the meeting Jeff Stearns, Vice President and C.E.O. of Kline Volvo, indicated that he agreed with all of staff's recommendations except the 50-foot-wide wetland buffer setback on the northeast side of the site. He indicated that the site was very expensive and because of this they would need every square foot of land they can get. A new site plan was submitted for review after the planning commission meeting by R.J. Ryan Construction (see new site plan on page 26). The new site shows the 50-foot-wide wetland buffer setback on the northeast side of the property. With this alternative the applicant would lose 29 parking spaces from their originally submitted site plan, for a total of 240. For comparison, this would be 64 more parking spaces than Lexus of Maplewood (they have 176 spaces) and 152 more parking spaces than Kline Volvo (they have 88 spaces). The newly submitted site plan meets the recommendations of staff and the planning commission, however, Mr. Stearns has not approved of the change to Kline Nissan's proposal. Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 Precedent The city council granted 75-foot-wide wetland buffer variances for the neighboring automobile dealerships. However, each development and variance request should be considered separately on its own merits. In the previously approved dealership wetland setback variances, the lots were smaller and the developments included smaller buildings with less parking. Therefore, staff feels that the land can be put to a reasonable use if the building and/or parking lot were decreased in size. Staff agrees that a variance is justified, just not the size requested. With a 50-foot-wide wetland buffer on the northeasterly side, the city will achieve a sUitable balance between determining a "reasonable use of the property" and code compliance. Conditional Use Permit The proposed 16-bay maintenance garage meets the findings for CUP approval. (Refer to the applicant's conditional use permit statement on pages 27 through 29). Lot Combination The Nissan site consists of two lots with vacant single-family homes located on them. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant should combine the two lots into one lot with Ramsey County. County Road D Alignment Study The City of Maplewood is working with URS, engineering consultants, to study the possible realignment of County Road D. The intent of the study is to explore the relocation options of moving County Road D further to the south, away from the 1-694 interchange. The study and proposed realignment should be complete by Fall 2002. Chuck Ahl, City Engineer, states that the realignment would take place to the south of the Nissan site and no land would be required from the applicants for the possible realignment. Parking The city's parking ordinance does not clearly define the special parking requirements for an automobile dealership, i.e., parking spaces for automobile inventory. However, using the ratio of 1 space for each 200 square feet of office/showroom, 1 space for every 1,000 square feet of parts storage, 3 spaces for each service bay, and 1 space per employee, the Nissan site is required to have 131 parking spaces. The applicant's original site plan shows 269 parking spaces and the newly submitted site plan shows 240 parking spaces. Building Design The proposed building will have a front exterior of fiat metal panel wall systems, corrugated metal panels, and anodized aluminum frames with insulated glass. The sides and rear exteriors will be rock-face concrete block and EIFS (exterior insulation finish system - a stucco-look material). 4 Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 The front and south side of the building will be visible from Highway 61. The south side of the building has a large expanse of rock-face concrete block, giving the appearance of a very large and plain wall. For this reason, staff recommends that design elements found on the front of the building also be implemented onto the south side, including the extension of the fiat metal panel wall systems with decorative corrugated metal panels. Much of the north elevation is already treated decoratively. After the May 6, 2002, planning commission meeting R.J. Ryan Construction submitted a new south elevation showing five, small square windows along the top portion of the elevation (see new south elevation on page 30). This proposal was submitted due to staffs concerns over the large rock-face concrete block wall that will be visible from Highway 61. Installing five small windows breaks up the wall only slightly. Therefore, staff further recommends that additional design elements be implemented on the south side. Landscaping The city's tree preservation ordinance requires that all quality trees removed from the site, which have a trunk diameter of at least 8 inches, be restored one for one up to 10 trees per acre. The site has 18 large trees, 14 of which will be removed. Therefore, the applicant is only required to plant 14 trees on the site. The proposed landscape plan shows a total of 35 trees on the site, exceeding the tree preservation requirements. The proposed landscaping is acceptable. The applicant has not provided a turf restoration plan, however, for the wetland buffer. This plan should be provided for city and watershed district approval before a building permit is issued. Any landscaping and turf establishment within the highway right-of-way should be subject to MnDOT's approval. Trash Storage The code requires that all trash containers be kept in screening enclosures with a closeable gate. The applicant proposes to keep their trash inside the building. If they later decide to have outdoor trash storage, they must provide an enclosure with a 100 percent opaque gate as required by code. Staff will monitor this during annual CUP reviews. Lighting The lighting plan meets city requirements and includes 24 parking lot pole lights (25 feet high) and 4 wall-pack lights. The maximum light intensity at the property line is .4 foot candles. Site-Plan Concerns Vehicle Display Pads There are six vehicle display pads shown on the site plan in addition to the 269 to 240 parking spaces proposed. Two of the display pads are shown constructed within the requested 25-foot- wide wetland buffer on the south side of the lot. A new site plan should be submitted which shows that the vehicle display pads do not encroach into the wetland buffer. 5 Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 Vehicle-Transport Unloading Unloading on public right-of-way has been a recurring problem with auto dealerships along Highway 61. Unloading on Highway 61 or County Road D is not allowed and should be prohibited by a condition of the CUP. Access The applicant should install a right-turn lane from Highway 61 as required for the Volvo and Lexus dealerships. This lane should be subject to MnDOT's approval. Police Concerns Lieutenant Banick expressed concern over the design and location of the proposed parking lot for the Nissan proposal. He states that the layout of the parking lot behind the building and the proximity to a major freeway will promote vehicle theft. Refer to Lieutenant Banick's memo on page 31. Other Comments Engineering: See attached grading and drainage statement on pages 32 and 33. Fire Marshal'. Any tanks being installed must have proper permits pulled. Building Official: Proposal looks good. A full plan review will be done when plans are submitted for the building permit. Female bathroom should be provided in maintenance garage. RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the wetland buffer setback variance resolution on pages 34 and 35, approving a 50-foot-wide wetland buffer variance along the northeast property line and a 75-foot-wide wetland buffer variance along the southeast and south sides of the property for the proposed Nissan dealership at 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive. Approval is based on the following findings: Strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property and not created by the property owner. The 100-foot-wide wetland buffer requirement would make development of this site difficult. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, since the applicant would improve a portion of the wetland buffer substantially over its present state and will treat storm water from the site with a subsurface storm water infiltration system. · The city council previously approved similar wetland buffer variances for three developments near this proposal. 6 Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: a. Dedicating a 50-foot-wide wetland protection buffer easement along the northeast lot line and a 25-foot-wide wetland protection buffer easement along the remaining wetland edge. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the buffer and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record this easement before the city will issue a building permit. b. Submitting a revised grading plan showing compliance with the required wetland dedications. The grading plan shall include grading to within 10 feet of the wetland edge on the side where the 50-foot-wide wetland buffer is required, with restoration of the remaining 40 feet of wetland buffer consisting of native plantings to be approved by staff and the watershed district (see landscape requirement below). c. Submitting a revised landscape plan for the restoration of 40 feet of the wetland- protection buffer on the northeast side of the site and for the 25-foot-wide buffer in the other wetland buffer areas. This plan shall be subject to staff and watershed district approval. Underground irrigation is required for all landscaped areas, excluding the wetland protection buffer. d. Installing city approved signs at the edge of the wetland-protection buffer which prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. e. Submitting a signed maintenance agreement to the RamseyANashington Metro Watershed District and the city for maintenance of the subsurface storm water infiltration system that accepts responsibility for any necessary maintenance and upkeep of the system. Adopt the resolution on pages 36 and 37, approving a conditional use permit for a maintenance garage at the proposed Kline dealership at 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive. Approval is based on the findings required by the code and subject to the following conditions: a. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. b. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. c. The applicant shall not load or unload vehicles on public right-of-way. d. Cars can only be parked on designated paved surfaces. e. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 Approve the plans date-stamped March 5, March 20, April 22, and May 9, 2002, for the proposed Nissan dealership at 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive, based on the findings required by the code. Approval is subject to the following conditions: ao Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. Before getting a building permit, the applicant must submit to staff for approval the following: 1) Dedicating a 50-foot-wide wetland protection buffer easement along the northeast lot line and a 25-foot-wide wetland protection buffer easement along the remaining wetland edge. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the buffer and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record this easement before the city will issue a building permit. 2) 3) 4) Submitting a revised grading plan showing compliance with the required wetland dedications. The grading plan shall include grading to within 10 feet of the wetland edge on the side where the 50-foot-wide wetland buffer is required, with restoration of the remaining 40 feet of wetland buffer consisting of native plantings to be approved by staff and the watershed district (see landscape requirement below). Submitting a revised landscape plan for the restoration of 40 feet of the wetland-protection buffer on the northeast side of the site and for the 25- foot-wide buffer in the other wetland buffer areas. This plan shall be subject to staff and watershed district approval. Underground irrigation is required for all landscaped areas, excluding the wetland protection buffer. A revised site plan showing the following revisions: a) A 50-foot setback for the parking lot from the wetland on the northeast side of the site. The revised site plan shall include the reconfiguration of the parking stalls and will ensure that no vehicle display pad encroaches into the required wetland buffer. b) A right-turn-lane from Highway 61 into the site, subject to MnDOT's approval. 5) c) A trash enclosure that matches the building in material. This enclosure shall not be placed in required parking spaces. It must have a 100 percent opaque closeable gate. If the trash dumpster is kept inside the building, an outdoor enclosure is not required. Verification that all watershed district special provisions, as indicated on the watershed district permit, are met prior to issuance of a building or grading permit for the site. Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 6) A revised south building elevation showing design elements found on the front of the building. 7) Combine the two parcels (3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive) into one parcel with Ramsey County. Proof of lot combination must be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: l) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. Install a refiectorized stop sign at the exit and a handicap-parking sign for each handicap accessible parking space. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure to meet code requirements, unless trash dumpsters are stored indoors. Install an in-ground lawn irrigation system for the parking lot islands and the sodded areas between the highway and the parking lot. Lawn irrigation in the right-of-way may be waived if MnDOT will not allow it. It is also waived in the wetland buffer area. Post signs identifying the customer and employee parking spaces. Install city approved wetland buffer signs at the edge of the wetland buffer easement that notifies that no building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping is allowed within the buffer. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: 1) The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. 2) The city receives a 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 if the building is occupied in the spring or summer. This approval does not include signage. All proposed signs must comply with the city's sign ordinance and the applicant must obtain all required sign permits prior to installation. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 9 Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: Existing Land Use: 4.71 acres Single-Family Homes (Vacant) SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: West: East: County Road D and Interstate 694 (Vadnais Heights) Wetland and Kline Volvo Dealership South of Wetland (Zoned M-l) Highway 61 Wetland PLANNING Land Use: Zoning: M-1 (Light Manufacturing) M-1 (Light Manufacturing) Ordinance Requirements Conditional Use Permit Section 36-151(b)(9)(c) requires a CUP for maintenance garages. 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 33 and 34. Variances Section 36-196(h)(3) of the wetland protection ordinance requires a 100-foot-wide wetland buffer for the proposed Kline dealership site. State law requires that the city council make the following findings to approve a variance from the zoning code: 1. Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship", as used in granting of a variance, means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. 10 Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 Design Review Section 25-70 of the city code requires that the community design review board make the following findings to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments, and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. APPLICATION DATE Mr. Kline submitted his complete applications on April 4, 2002. The required 60-day deadline for decisions on this proposal is June 3, 2002. P\sec3\Nissan.2.doc Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Land Use Map 4. Site Plan 5. Landscape/Lighting Plan 6. Building Elevations 7. Nissan Dealer Signature Elements 8. Lower Level Floor Plan 9. Upper Level Floor Plan 10. Watershed District Approval Letter dated April 26, 2002 11. Applicant's Narrative Statement for the Variance dated March 5, 2002 12. Wetland Setbacks Map 13. New Site Plan (Submitted 5/9/02) 14.Applicant's Narrative Statement for the Conditional Use Permit dated March 5, 2002 15. New South Elevation (Submitted 5/9~02) 16. Memo from Lieutenant Banick dated April 25, 2002 17. Memo from Assistant City Engineer dated April 29, 2002 18. Variance Resolution 19. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 20. Plans Date-Stamped March 5, March 20, April 22, and May 9, 2002 (separate attachments) 11 Kline Nissan May 8, 2002 Attachment 1 Interstate 694 County Road D 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive N Location Map 12 Attachment 2 Interstate 694 m mi m ~ m. County Road D 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive/ ZONING Light Manufacturing (M-l) Single Dwelling Residential (R-1) ----- Planned Urban Development(PUD) Zoning Map 13 Attachment 3 Interstate 694 County Road D M-1 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive Open Space ZONING Light Manufacturing (M-l) Single Dwelling Residential (R-1) __ Multiple Dwelling Residential (R-3) ~ Open Space Land Use Map 14 Attachment 4 ~ Z Z Proposed Building For KLINE NISSAN Maplewood, Minnesota 15 SITE PLAN Attachment 5 KLINE NISSAN Maplewood, Minnesota LANDSCAPE/ LIGHTING PLAN 16 Attachment 67 Proposed Building For KLINE NISSAN Maplewood, Minnesota 17 ELEVATIONS Attachment 7 Outdoor Vehicle Display 18 NISSAN DEALER SIGNATURE ELEMENTS Dealership Exterior showing elements of the new design The optional Canopy is a striking feature of the new design 19 NISSAN DEALER SIGNATURE ELEMENTS Attachment 8 o o L___ Proposed Building For KLINE NISSAN Maplewoocl, Minnesota 2o FLOOR PLANS Attachment 9 Proposed Building For K LINE NISSAN ~aplewood, ~innesota ~ UPPER LEVEL 21 FLOOR PLANS Ra msey-Was h ington Metro District Attachment 10 1902 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 (651)704-2089 fax: (651)704-2092 emaih office@rwmwd.org 4/26/02 Shann Finwall City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear Shann, I am including the documentation you requested regarding the reasons the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District granted a buffer variance for the Kline Auto World project on Highway 61. The Kline Auto World project has a Protect category wetland (City of Maplewood class 1) on the east and south side of the project. The Watershed District requires a 75-foot no- disturb buffer on protect category wetland. The owner of Kline Auto World requested a variance from this requirement. The variance was granted for the same reasons as those for the Kline Nissan project. The buffer was highly degraded and offered little benefit for wildlife or buffer and the owner was willing to install a very effective storm water infiltration system that will treat storm water from the site before it is discharged to the wetland. The owner will also plant a high-quality wetland buffer consisting of native species that will be more beneficial to the wetland than the degraded buffer that is currently adjacent to the wetland. The Watershed Board is concerned about protecting the wetland during construction of the project and instructed me to include additional provisions that will need to be completed before a grading permit is issued. I have enclosed a copy of those provisions. I would appreciates the City's cooperation in not allowing any grading to begin on this project until you have verified that these provisions have been met. Please call me if you have any questions or comments. Karl Hammers District Technician 22 02-17 Special Provisions The owner shall submit a signed maintenance agreement for the subsurface storm water infiltration system. An average 75-foot wide no-disturb buffer shall be maintained between the surrounding wetland and the proposed site. On April 3, 2002 the Watershed Board granted a variance allowing the entire buffer to be removed provided that a 25-foot buffer is established with native vegetation after the infiltration system is installed. 3. The silt fence along the wetland edge shall be monofilament. The bottom elevation of the infiltration trenches shall be no lower than two feet above the water level of the nearby wetland. The water level for this provision shall be considered the highest elevation along the delineated wetland edge surrounding the site. A survey shall be conducted to determine this elevation. On April 3, 2002 the Watershed Board passed a motion requiring the following provisions to be added to the permit as a result of granting the variance request. A statement shall be placed on the grading plans requiring that the silt fence be inspected each morning and any damaged silt fence repaired immediately. Grading sequencing plans shall be submitted that show: a. How storm water will directed away from the infiltration system until the site is completely stabilized. b. How the wetland will be protected from sedimentation until the site is completely stabilized. 23 Attachment ll KLINE AUTO WORLD OLDSMOBILE MITSUBISHI SUZUKI NISSAN VOLVO (651) 484-3901 March 5, 2002 City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 Attn: Mr. Tom Ekstrand City Planner Re: Proposed New Location of Kline Nissan Dear Mr. Ekstrand: Please consider our request for setback variance from the wetlands for our proposed new location on Highway 61 for our Nissan franchise. Due to the limited amount of available visible land in Maplewood and its proximity to our existing facility and its proximity to our competitors we have chosen this site, although it is not ideal. This site is unique because of the wetland on two plus sides of the property. We have hired R.J. Ryan Construction, Inc., and Sunde Engineering to work with the Ramsey Washington Watershed District to design a state-of-the-art dealership for this site, with keeping in mind the best utilization of the property and still maintaining the regulation of the Watershed District for ponding and runoff. Without this variance, this site would be deemed unusable for our intentions of constructing our new facility. Please consider our variance request for this site. We look forward to working with the City of Maplewood and the Ramsey Washington County Watershed District on our attempt to develop this property. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Rick Kline Kline Nissan Kline Nissan-let01 city of maplewood 24 Attachment 12 COUNTY $89'~'~'E ROAD 'D' STYI.C xJ, PO \ 2/~.) ¢'r~,) SITE PLAN - s T,dU.U~O ~0 6 25 WETLAND SETBACKS Attachment 13 C 0 U N T Y S 89'58'00' E ROAD 'D' B612 HATCH New Site Plan 26 FROM :R.J. RYAN FAX NO. :6S1-681-0215 Apr. Ryan Construction, Inc. 26 2082 08:24RM P2 Attachment 14 1100 Mendota H®lghts Road · Mendota Heights. MN 55120 · (651) 681-0200 · Fax (651) 681-0235 March 5, 2002 Mr. Tom Ekstrand City of Maplewood Associate Planner 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 53709 Re: Site plan submittal~ Conditional Use Permit Kline Nissan Dealership State Highway 61 Dear Tom: O.n behalf-of R.J. Ryan Construction, Inc., & Kline Nissan, the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for construction of a Car Dealership and maintenance garage in association with the site plan approvat, variance, and watershed permit approval. The following responses to the cdteria for a conditional use permit are based upon the site plan package submitted to the City of Maplewood.on March4., 2002, and on the grading permit plan set submitted to the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District on March 4, 2002. ¸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. The E. xistingz, oning is M-1 manufacturing which allows as an outright use car dealerships and display lots. The majority of car dealerships on Highway 61 haveas.a service to their customers a maintenance facility specifically integrated into the car dealership operation. The properties to the south, Ktine Volvo, Lexus of Maplewood, currently have operational maintenance garages as does the Toyota Dealership located across Highway 61. The proposed maintenance garage will occupy approximately 10,000 sq. ff of the proposed 19,000 sq. ft facility. All maintenance on the vehicles will occur within the structure as required by Code. The exterior of the maintenance area will be constructed of the An Equal Opportunity Employer 27 FROM :R.J. RYAN FAX NO. :651-681-023S Apr. 26 2002 08:25AM P3 3 same rock-faced concrete masonry units as the showroom and customer service area, similar to the Volvo Dealership. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. The proposed use would improve the existing land use from a sub standard residential home to a permanent structure compatible with all applicable Design Review Committee criteria and building codes. The use would not depreciate property values. The improvement to the slope adjacent to the wet land will eliminate the erodabte slope conditions and undesirable ground cover. The proposed grading plan will improve the water quality, re-vegetate the slope with native and appropriate grass species, conducive to an improved wetland and wildlife habitat. 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. The proposed will not involve any of the above activities due to its location in an M-1 district andlack of residentia! properties nearby. The exterior lights are down cast cut off fixture at a 25' height and will illuminate the parking lot and display areas. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed street. The proposed site plan will only have access from the northbound lanes of State-Highway 61. Southbound trafficon State Highway 61 will not have access to the site. The entrance to the site will be coordinated with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and will require a driveway access permit. The. location of the NiSsan dealership was selected based upon the traffic already on Highway 61 and the surrounding land uses. The car dealership wilt not adversely affect the existing traffic on Highway 61 or any let. al st~eeL 28 .FROM :R.J. RYAN FAX NO. :651-681-0235 Apr. 26 2002 08:25AM P4 The use would be served by adequate pubtic facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. The MWCC has been contacted and wilt allow connection to the sanitary sewer. Storm drainage from the site has been discussed with the City and Watershed. A grading permit and plan set has been submitted to the watershed for approval. The use would not create excessive edditional costs for public facilities or service~ No expansion of existing public facilities will be required. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. The proposed use has.been designed to enhance the 'wetland edge and provide a buffer yard area between the development and the wetland. The erodabte stopes wll/be eliminated and a buffer yard at a 3:1 slope will' be created along the entire wetland boundary. The buffer yard improved at no cost to the watershed district. The use would cause rrrinimat adverse environmenta[ effect~.. As. stated, alt stormwater wilt be controlled and channeled through outlet structures with appropriate rip rap and erosional/sedimentation controls in place. Secondly, the maintenance garage operations will be located within the proposed structure. All maintenance operations regarding recycling waste products/oils of the vehicles will be performed to state building, codes and MPCA regulations. Thank. you for the opportunity you have-given us to present this proposal to you. We look forward to working with the City of Maplewood on this facility. If you have any questionsplease don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, Jack-Grotkin Vice President Jg-sg Kline Nissan-let11 use pe~rmt 29 Attachment 15 w~u. ~ ('~$OUTH ELEVATION New South Elevation 30 Attachment 16 MEMO To: Shann Finwall, Associate Planner'~ From: Lieutenant John Banick~"[ Subject: PROJECT REVIEW - Kline Nissan Car Dealership Date: April 25, 2002 I have reviewed the attached project proposal. It should be noted that I am extremely concern about the design and location of the parking lots in this proposal. I believe that the location of this development within our City, the design / layout of the parking lots, and proximity to a major freeway will promote vehicle theft and theft from vehicle calls. Currently, our automobile dealerships generate a fair amount of police activity for our department. However, it is not only the increase in calls for service that concerns me. It is also the inability to effectively police this proposed location. The parking lot areas in this proposal would also be hidden from normal traffic on Highway 61. Therefore, removing citizens as an effective crime prevention tool. I showed these plans to a veteran police sergeant, police officer, and dispatcher who have many years of law enforcement experience. They all concurred that this location and design encouraged criminal activity. The plan seems to include an excellent lighting plan that should help to reduce the amount of criminal activity, however, based on the above concerns I recommend that this design be denied. cc: Chief Winger Deputy Chief Thomalla Lieutenant Rabbett 31 Attachment 17 Kline Nissan- Engineering Plan Review Maplewood Engineering Department Chris Cavett, April 29, 2002 Storm Water Management/Storm Water Treatment: Summary: The storm water management plan is very similar to the system at the nearby Volvo dealer. The system is designed as an innovative system of "hidden" subsurface storage and infiltration basins. The applicant has worked extensively with the watershed in the development of the storm water management system. In fact this is an example of alternatives that fully developed sites can use in the future. The concepts and intent of the storm water management design are good and because the applicant has worked closely with the watershed, we do not intend to comment or review the plan in extensive detail. Below are the requirements the City of Maplewood has: 1. Applicant shall submit rtmoff calculations to the Maplewood Engineering department before final approval of the site plan. The applicant, their contractor and their engineer shall ensure that the erosion and sediment control practices are being strictly used and maintained during construction as failure to do so will risk the integrity of the design and the applicant's investment in this type of system. Applicant shall submit an "Annual" maintenance record of the system, as part of their annual CIP review process. The "Trap" catch basins and manholes will require regular cleaning and sediment removal to maintain the integrity of the drainage system. Again failure to properly maintain the system will jeopardize the integrity of the design and applicant's investment in this type of system. Grading and Erosion Control: There is grading being proposed within the required wetland buffer, (as defined by ordinance). It is left up to opinion whether the intent of the wetland buffer is being met. From an engineering standpoint, a variance to the buffer requirement is justifiable, but to what extent is the question to be answered. The drainage system design as proposed will have less impact on the wetland than a conventional drainage design. A properly restored native upland buffer should be planted in the remaining buffer area. The applicant shall submit a detailed "Native" landscaping plan for all areas within the wetland buffer area. The plan shall be approved by the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. All buffer work shall be completed within 14-days of final 32 grading. Final grading shall not be approved by the city until all buffer planting and landscaping work is completed and approved by the watershed. Utilities: 1. Coordinate all water main work with the St. Paul Regional Water Services. Obtain permit from the Metropolitan Council of Environmemal Services for sewer service connection to the existing MCES Interceptor. The City of Maplewood also requires a sewer service permit. The City of Maplewood permit will not be issued until the applicant has obtained a permit from MCES. Driveways and Streets: 1. The applicant will be required to obtain an approval and an access permit from Mn/DOT 33 Attachment 18 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Rick Kline, of Kline Auto World, applied for a variance from the zoning ordinance. WHEREAS, this variance applies to properties at 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive. The property identification numbers are 03-29-22-22-0002 and 03-29-22-22-0003. The legal description is: Tract "A", Registered Land Survey No. 15, on file in the office of the Registrar of Titles within and for said County, except that part lying easterly of a line beginning at a point on the north line of said Tract 1494.91 feet west of the northeast corner of said Tract; thence southeasterly at an angle of 56 degrees, 43 minutes with said north line 445.39 feet; thence at an angle of 79 degrees 39 minutes to the right 188.7 feet to a point on the south line of said Tract 1303.88 feet west from the southeast corner of said Tract, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Torrens Certificate Number: 171003. WHEREAS, Section 36-196(h)(3) of the wetland protection ordinance requires a 100-foot- wide wetland buffer. WHEREAS, the applicant proposed a 75-foot-wide wetland buffer. WHEREAS, the city council approved a wetland buffer variance ranging from a 50-foot-wide buffer on the northeast side of the property to a 75-foot-wide buffer on the south and southeast sides of the site. WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: 1. On May 6, 2002, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this variance. The city council held a public hearing on City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described variance for the following reasons: Strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property and not created by the property owner. The 100-foot-wide wetland buffer requirement would make development of this site difficult. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, since the applicant would improve a portion of the wetland buffer substantially over its present state and will treat storm water from the site with a subsurface storm water infiltration system. 34 3. The city council previously approved similar wetland buffer variances for three developments near this proposal. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: Dedicating a 50-foot-wide wetland protection buffer easement along the northeast lot line and a 25-foot-wide wetland protection buffer easement along the remaining wetland edge. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the buffer and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record this easement before the city will issue a building permit. Submitting a revised grading plan showing compliance with the required wetland dedications. The grading plan shall include grading to within 10 feet of the wetland edge on the side where the 50-foot-wide wetland buffer is required, with restoration of the remaining 40 feet of wetland buffer consisting of native plantings to be approved by staff and the watershed district (see landscape requirement below). Submitting a revised landscape plan for the restoration of 40 feet of the wetland- protection buffer on the northeast side of the site and for the 25-foot-wide buffer in the other wetland buffer areas. This plan shall be subject to staff and watershed district approval. Underground irrigation is required for all landscaped areas, excluding the wetland protection buffer. 4. Installing city approved signs at the edge of the wetland-protection buffer which prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. Submitting a signed maintenance agreement to the Ramsey/VVashington Metro Watershed District and the city for maintenance of the subsurface storm water infiltration system that accepts responsibility for any necessary maintenance and upkeep of the system. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on 35 Attachment 19 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Rick Kline, of Kline Auto World, applied for a conditional use permit for a motor vehicle maintenance garage as part of a new Nissan dealership; WHEREAS, this permit applies to properties at 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive. The property identification numbers are 03-29-22-22-0002 and 03-29-22-22-0003. The legal description is: Tract "A", Registered Land Survey No. 15, on file in the office of the Registrar of Titles within and for said County, except that part lying easterly of a line beginning at a point on the north line of said Tract 1494.91 feet west of the northeast corner of said Tract; thence southeasterly at an angle of 56 degrees, 43 minutes with said north line 445.39 feet; thence at an angle of 79 degrees 39 minutes to the right 188.7 feet to a point on the south line of said Tract 1303.88 feet west from the southeast corner of said Tract, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Torrens Certificate Number: 171003. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On May 6, 2002, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. On , the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the above-described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approves this permit because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water 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. 36 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is Subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. 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 become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The applicant shall not load or unload vehicles on public right-of-way. 4. Cars can only be parked on designated paved surfaces. 5. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on 37 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Design Review - 3M Building #277 Conway Avenue East of McKnight Road May 3, 2002 INTRODUCTION 3M Company is proposing to build a 56,861-square-foot (total of both floors), two-story building on the north side of Conway Avenue west of the Building #270 parking lot. The applicant would use this building to house computer and data-processing equipment. They anticipate a parking need for 28 new parking spaces. There would be 26 spaces west of the proposed building and two on the north side. The paved area on the north is meant for dock access and deliveries. The building would have an extedor of brick, precast concrete and metal panels. The brick would match the color of the other brick buildings in 3M Center. The metal panels would be a compatible color to the brick, though the applicant has not determined the panel color. Refer to the maps and building elevations on pages 3-6 and the enclosed plans. DISCUSSION Building Design The proposed building would fit in with the other buildings at 3M Center. If the applicant has not picked the color of the metal panels by the meeting date, staff suggests that the review board direct staff to approve the building colors prior to building permit issuance. Parking The proposed building would have adequate parking. Should parking needs change, and more parking be needed in the future, there is a considerable amount of open and ramped parking next to this site. Landscaping The applicant proposes to remove 11 existing trees along 5th Street and Conway Avenue but would replant the perimeter of the site with 30 new trees and two planting beds. Refer to the landscape plan. The proposed landscaping seems somewhat sparse in consideration of the large south elevation of the proposed building. Staff recommends that the applicant add landscaping along the south side by including three to four planting beds spaced along the front to break up and soften this long elevation. The revised plan should also identify the planting species, sizes and quantities. City code requires deciduous trees to be at least 2 % inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. Coniferous trees must be at least six feet tall. Semi Trailers The site is currently used as a parking area for semi trailers. These would be relocated to 3M's Case Street distribution center in St. Paul. Engineering Comments Chris Cavett, the Maplewood Assistant City Engineer, reviewed the applicant's civil drawings. Mr. Cavett felt that the applicant should develop the plans further. He outlined his concerns in the report on page 7. The review board should require that the applicant submit revised civil- engineering plans for the review and approval of the city engineer. RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans date-stamped Apdl 17, 2002 for proposed Building #277 at 3M Center on Conway Avenue. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall submit the following to staff for approval: a. A revised grading, drainage and erosion-control plan addressing the issues in Mr. Cavett's memo. bo A revised landscape plan that includes three to four planting beds in front of the south elevation. The revised plan shall also identify the planting species, sizes and quantities. 3. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 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 if the building is occupied in the spdng or summer. p: sec36-29~3 M~r277. doc Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Landscape/Site Plan 3. Building Elevations 4. Chds Cavett's Comments dated Apd129, 2002 5. Plans date-stamped April 17, 2002 (separate attachment) 2 Attachment 1 MINNEHAHA AV~. 4ARGARET AVE:. 12 AF~ON RD. Creek MAY~R LN. Lake >- F-- Z LOCATION MAP Attachment 2 FFE = .:['...:... -" :[.:i,::- ii.. i LANDSCAPE I SITE PLAN 4 U.I I.LI fill Attachment 4' 3M Data Center- Engineering Plan Review Maplewood Engineering Department Chris Cavett, April 29, 2002 Storm Water Management/Storm Water Treatment: Summary: It appeas that the applicant has proposed to manage on-site storm water through the use ora number of Best Management Practices, BMP's, (drainage swales, Infiltration trenches, Filter strips and treatment structures. However, what exactly is proposed is not clearly understood, as the civil plans appear to be incomplete. 1. Revise and resubmit the grading, drainage and milky plans to address the following items: · The drainage calculations indicate a "filter strip" before the infiltration trench, but it is not found on the plan. · Again the drainage calculations indicate plantings in the filter strip, yet nothing is indicated in the landscape of grading plans. · The drainage calculations and the details indicate an "observation well" at the end of the infiltration trench, but is not found on the plan. · A "stormceptor" is called out on the utility plans. Its purpose at that location is not clearly understood. Nor is the purpose of the storm pipe coming into it from the south understood. Where is it coming from? · On the Utility plan, there is a" 6" clean-out" called om on the 10-inch storm pipe. Is this intended to be on the sanitary sewer service7 Where is the 10-inch storm pipe coming from? Suggestion: Graded swales have been proposed to slow down runoff.and encourage infiltration. Consider placing some of the landscaping in these areas to facilitate infiltration. Consider rainwater gardens in some of these areas. See comment below about grading of the boulevard swales. The drainage calculations continue to refer to the "city storm sewer". Note, that the systems west and north are private, 3M storm sewer systems. The pubhc systems are east and south on Conway Avenue and in the west boulevard of the service road. 4. Show existing utilities on the grading and drainage plan. Gradin~ and Erosion Control: Summary: The grading plan indicates that swales will be graded into the boulevard along Conway and the service road. This is a good practice for benefit water quality. Common past practices of contractors and engineers would be to grade the boulevards to drain directly into the street. The applicant should be taken to ensure that the boulevard is graded as proposed in the plans. Utilities: No comments TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Interview of Applicants for CDRB Membership April 3, 2002 INTRODUCTION There are three applicants for the community design review board (CDRB) vacancy including Diana Longrie-Kline, Richard Eugene Currie, and Julie Lin Beitler. The three applicants will be present at the April 9, 2002, CDRB meeting for interviews by the board. BACKGROUND The vacancy is for the remainder of Board Member Tim Johnson's two-year term which would end January 1, 2003. DISCUSSION According to the city's policy for appointing CDRB vacancies, the CDRB will conduct their own interviews with candidates and make a recommendation and share their rankings with the city council. The minutes of the interview meetings will include some description and highlights of each candidate interviewed. The city council will then conduct their own interviews, and may request that the CDRB or staff submit questions that they could ask when doing their interviews. When making their selection, the city council will then take into account all the information provided by staff, CDRB and the applicants. They may also consider other factors such as longevity or geography in the community. RECOMMENDATION Interview the applicants and forward an appointment recommendation to the city council. p:/cdrb/interview Applications Attached: 1. Diana Longrie-Kline 2. Richard Eugene Currie 3. Julie Lin Beitler CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPLICANT INFORMATION FORM PHONE NO..Work: ~[~-' '~¢ {,- [ ~ ~ [ Home: (.o ,~[- 'gr"~z'("- ]l-{X:)t0 DA---TE g$ !17 1) HOW long have you lived in the City of Maplewood? _ l ~ ~ f".~ 2) Will other commitments make regular attendance at meetings difficult? Yes~ No ~" Comments: 3) On which Board or Commission are you interested in serving? (please check) X Community Design Review Board ~ Park & Recreation Commission . Housing & Redevelopment Authority ~ Planning Commission ... Human Relations Commission . Police Civil Service Commission 4) Do you have any .specific areas of interest within this Board's or Commission's scope of responsibilities? 5) List other organizations or clubs in the Community in which you have been or are an active participant: ,, . _ V;, '.-_'r._-r '--'"'"- ~y wuulu,,yuu ~lKe I0 serv~ on 1:nis uoard or L;ommission? THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION SHALL BE CLASSIFIED AS PUBLIC. FORMS~BRD&COMM.APL 10/96 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPLICANT INFORMATION FORM NAME ADDRESS /'~,~ r'/ PHONE NO. work: d-,=,5'l DATE 1) 2) How long have you lived in the City of Maplewood? Will other cor~mitments make regular attendance at meetings difficult? Yes __ Comments: ZIP / No ~ 3) 4) On which Board or Commission are you interested in serving? (please check) '~ Community Design Review Board ~ Park & Recreation Commission Housing & Redevelopment Authority ~ Planning Commission ~ Human Relations Commission ~ Police Civil Service Commission Do you have any specific areas of interest within this Board's or Commission's scope of responsibilities? 5) List other organizations or clubs in the Community in which you have been or are an active participant: 6) Why would you like to serve on this Board or Commission? ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION SHALL BE CLASSIFIED AS PUBLIC. NOV ! 3 200! " ~ NAME ADDRESS PHONE NO. Work: CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPLICANT INFORMATION FORM Attachment 3 :i >-' ', ~-' ', ,"!= ! ~) NOV !42001~i!~ Home: _J05i- r-Jz~r~- 0~_~ ~ 3 DATE 1) 2) How long have you lived in the City of Maplewood? I 1 Will other commitments make regular attendance at meetings difficult? Yes ~ No 'V'/' Comments: /'~iL, '~'-~1 ~ 3) On which Board or Commission are you interested in serving? (please check) ',/' Community Design Review Board Park & Recreation Commission ~ Housing & Redevelopment Authority ~ Planning Commission ~ Human Relations Commission ~ Police Civil Service Commission 4) Do you have any specific areas of interest within this Board's or Commission's scope of responsibilities? 5) List other or~anizatio.,ns or clubs in th.e Community in which you hav.e been or are. an active participant: 6) ~l~'~o~ut~Uy~t~ ~rve on th,s' '~'~oar~'~or~omm/is'~s~o .~''CF~' THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION SHALL BE CLASSIFIED AS PUBLIC. FORMS~BRD&COMM.APL 4 10/96 JULIE BEITLER 1915 Price Ave Maplewood, MN 55109 651-748-0233 OBJECTIVE: To apply my land use planning and GIS skills in a volunteer position. EDUCATION: 2000-present Masters Of GIS (MGIS) expected graduation 2003 University of Minnesota, Minneapolis 1994-1998 B.S., Land Use Planning Minor: GIS/Cartography University of Wisconsin, River Falls 1990-1994 Osceola High School - Osceola, WI. COMPUTER SKILLS: Arc/Info Arc/View MapInfo Smallworld IDRISI Office 2000 Windows NT WORK EXPERIENCE: Nov 99-present Reliant Energy Minnegasco, Minneapolis, MN Senior GIS Specialist. Data conversion, raster scanning/placement, extensive research/analysis of gas facilities, interview committee July 98-present The Olive Garden, Maplewood, MN Server. Utilize public relation skills by serving customers and cooperating with other servers June 98-Nov 98 University of Wisconsin, River Falls, WI Intern position. Conducted a Cost of Community Service Study, data collection, and data rhanagbment May 95-Oct 95 Douglas-Hanson Co.,Inc., Hammond, WI Oct 96-May 98 Factory laborer. Acquired skills of accuracy and time management May 97-Sept 97 Lake Kountrv Landscaping, Osceola, WI Maintain nursery stock and assist customers with landscape designs Sept 94-May 95 Oct 95-Oct 96 DJ's Mart, Hammond, WI Cashier/Cook. Duties included: balancing cash register, assisting customers, stocking shelves, inventory, and opening/closing store Jan 95-May 95 University o_f Wisconsin, River Falls, WI Greenhouse Work Study. Duties included: maintain/transplant strawberry hybrids, organize information, and field work