The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/10/2009 AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: a. January 13, 2009 5. Design Review: a. Mogren Office Building, South of 2607 White Bear Avenue 6. Unfinished Business: 7. Visitor Presentations: 8. Board Presentations: 9. Staff Presentations: a. 2008 Community Design Review Board Annual Report b. Update on Board Member Appointments c. Amendment to the Rules of Procedure 10. Adjourn DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2009 I. CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Boardmember John Demko Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina Chairperson Linda Olson Boardmember Ananth Shankar Boardmember Matt Wise Absent Present Absent Present Present Staff Present: Michael Martin. Planner III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boardmember Shankar moved to approve the agenda as presented. Boardmember Wise seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. November 25, 2008 Boardmember Wise moved approval of the minutes of November 25, 2008, as presented. Boardmember Shankar seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all V. DESIGN REVIEW a. Feed Products North Office Building, 1300 McKnight Road Planner Michael Martin presented the staff report explaining the request by Feed Products North to build a 5,800-square-foot, two-story office building and possibly some lease space on the westerly portion of the property, located on the east side of McKnight Road west of the Lakewood Drive bridge. Boardmember Ledvina asked staff if there were screening concerns by residents during the planning commission's public hearing regarding the south boundary of this site. Planner Martin responded that the resident from the southeast corner of the site was present at the public hearing with concerns of light spillage onto his property and he was concerned that it would be screened. Bob Moser of Moser Homes was present representing the applicant. Mr. Moser said he was present at the planning commission public hearing and assured the residents that the Community Design Review Board 2 Minutes 01-13-2009 applicant is receptive to redesigning the lighting plan as necessary to achieve what is required by code, as well as to accommodate the neighbors. Mr. Moser said a screening plan has not been submitted, but a fence is likely since it is difficult to achieve an 80 percent opaque coverage with trees. Mr. Moser said the parking lot plan design did not meet the setback requirements, but this has been resolved by incorporating an angle into the parking lot and it now conforms to the required setback off of Lakewood Drive. Mr. Moser said because of the grade in this area a short retaining wall has been proposed also. Mr. Moser presented sample materials of roofing, Anderson windows, and siding color and accents to be used on the building. Mr. Moser explained that a Timberline dimensional shingle, which is shake-like in appearance, has been proposed for the roof. Mr. Moser said they would like to have the option to install maintenance-free siding material on the exterior building and use the Hardy plank materials for accent areas. Mr. Moser said there would also be maintenance-free composite decking installed on the building. Mr. Moser said the stone to be used on the building has not yet been selected. Mr. Moser said they are receptive to all of the staff recommendations and will follow their lead on those items. Boardmember Shankar asked if the buff colored maintenance-free siding will replace the orange colored sample shown on the rendering. Mr. Moser replied affirmatively. Boardmember Wise asked Mr. Moser to comment on their intentions for site lighting fixture design. Mr. Moser responded that one type of fixture he is accustomed to using for a commercial setting is a tall pole going vertically and then horizontally with a box-type canopy to divert the light down. Mr. Moser said this design is very functional in terms of restricting the area the lights are disbursed to. Mr. Moser said he has experience with constructing commercial buildings close to residential areas. Mr. Moser said they may need to concentrate more of the lighting in the parking lot to meet required city code and less lighting on the south side of the property. Boardmember Ledvina asked if the windows will be tinted. Mr. Moser responded negatively and added that the windows proposed are standard residential window units. Boardmember Ledvina asked if a ledge-stone product design would be used. Mr. Moser responded affirmatively. Boardmember Shankar asked if gutters would be used on the building. Mr. Moser responded that they have not selected anything yet, but gutters would be need at the entrances and decks. Mr. Moser said they would try to put them in the least conspicuous side of the building keeping them as subtle as possible, getting the gutter materials in the same or a very similar color to the exterior siding. Boardmember Ledvina asked if Mr. Moser has talked with the residents regarding the type of screening to be used. Mr. Moser said he talked with some of the residents after the planning commission meeting and they were in agreement with a fence screening. Mr. Ledvina asked if a berm has been considered with trees planted. Mr. Moser said he would need to check the elevations and discuss it with the engineer to be sure it would not cause any problems. Community Design Review Board Minutes 01-13-2009 3 Boardmember Shankar moved approval of the plans date-stamped November 4, 2008, for the proposed Feed Products North office building. Approval is based on the findings for approval required by ordinance and subject to the developer doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the applicant has not obtained a building permit by that time. After two years this review must be repeated. 2. Obtain a conditional use permit from the city council for the proposed office building. 3. Comply with the requirements of Shann Finwall in her report dated December 26, 2008. 4. Comply with the requirements of the engineering report by Steve Kummer dated December 2, 2008. The site plan shall be revised, as shown to the commission at the public hearing, with a retaining wall along the east side of the parking lot near Lakewood Drive. The retaining wall and site grades shall be subject to the approval of the city's engineering department. 5. Comply with the requirements of Ginny Gaynor in her report dated November 26, 2008. 6. Take into account the suggestions by Lieutenant Shortreed as stated in his report. 7. Revise the site plan to provide a is-foot parking lot setback from the Lakewood Drive right-of-way line. If a is-foot setback cannot be provided, the applicant must apply for a setback variance. 8. Any retaining walls over four feet tall shall be designed by a structural engineer and have a protective guard rail or fence on top. 9. The applicant shall install in-ground lawn irrigation in formal landscaped areas. 10. The landscaping plan shall be revised to include the following: a. A six-foot-tall and 80 percent opaque buffer along the south side of the property to screen the area between both parking lots and the connecting drive aisle. The community design review board recommends that the use of berming and landscaping be used for the buffer on the south side. b. Five over-story trees along the east side of the east parking lot. The three evergreens can be deleted. c. Four ornamental deciduous trees on the west side of the proposed building. d. Additional landscaping in the "front yard" in front of the building's main entrance (easterly side), subject to staff approval. 11. Obtain any necessary permits from the RamseylWashington Metro Watershed District. 12. All work shall follow the approved plans. The city planner may approve minor changes. 13. All pole-mounted site lights shall comply with the 25-foot height maximum. The site lighting plan shall be redesigned so that the light intensity does not exceed .4 foot- Community Design Review Board 4 Minutes 01-13-2009 candles at the property lines. All lighting fixtures shall be designed so lenses and bulbs are recessed or shielded to avoid nuisance complaints. All site lights are required to shine inward toward the site and not toward any residential neighbors. The community design review board highly recommends that the applicant look at the use of residential type site lighting fixtures that are more in character with the building design. 14.lf outdoor trash storage is used, such containers must be kept in a screening enclosure. The design and placement of the enclosure shall be subject to staff approval. 15. Before obtaining a building permit, the applicant shall provide cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of completing landscaping and other site improvements. An irrevocable letter of credit shall include the following provisions: a. The letter of credit must clearly indicate that it is an irrevocable letter of credit in the name of the City of Maplewood, payable on demand, to assure compliance with the terms of the developer's agreement. b. The letter of credit must allow for partial withdrawals as needed to guarantee partial project payments covered under the terms of the letter of credit. c. The letter of credit shall be for a one-year duration and must have a condition indicating automatic renewal, with notification to the city a minimum of 60 days prior to its expiration. Boardmember Wise seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Review Planner Martin explained that Jennifer Haskamp of Pulse Land Group would be presenting information on the Sustainability Chapter of the draft comprehensive plan update. Ms. Haskamp gave a presentation and requested the board review the Sustainability Chapter again to ensure that the chapter addresses their issues and concerns. Ms. Haskamp asked the board for comments or questions they might have about this chapter or the document. Boardmember Shankar said he felt the document is very well put together. Mr. Shankar asked if the board would have an opportunity to submit comments in the next month or two. Ms. Haskamp assured the board that she will continue to work with the city on this document and board members can contact her or Planner Mike Martin with any comments. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS a. January 26 City Council Meeting Representative: Ananth Shankar Community Design Review Board Minutes 01-13-2009 5 IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Sustainable Maplewood Planner Martin said an informational disc of the students work was included in board members packets from planner Shann Finwall. Planner Martin said Ms. Finwall will attend a February board meeting to further describe the students' recommendations and how the board can begin to work with them. b. Planner Martin informed the board that Dewayne Konewko, recently appointed director of community development and parks, will be attending a February board meeting. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 6:55 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: Acting City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Mogren Office Building-Design Review South of 2607 White Bear Avenue February 2, 2009 INTRODUCTION Jim Kellison, of Kelco Services, is requesting design approval of a 2,673-square-foot, one-story office building on the vacant property south of 2607 White Bear Avenue. The proposed office building would have a hip roof with asphalt shingles, Horizontal-lap Hardie siding, shake siding and brick. Refer to the attachments. DISCUSSION Architectural and Site Considerations The proposed office building is well designed and the proposed exterior building materials are durable and attractive. Parking and Access The city code requires 13 parking spaces. The proposed site plan meets this requirement. All parking setback, paving, curbing and dimensional requirements would be met. The access to the site will be shared with the property to the north. There is an existing shared-access agreement in place which was required when the building to the north expanded in 1996. Mr. Kellison stated that they propose to revise this agreement to make sure it is in order legally in consideration of current property ownerships. Tree Replacement and Landscaping There are only a few trees on site. Staff, therefore, waived the requirement for a full tree survey. The three trees on the site appear to be two ash and one poplar. To comply with the tree removal ordinance, the applicant should measure the caliper sizes of these trees and apply the formula for tree replacement for review by staff. The landscaping proposed is attractive and should be sufficient, unless, after applying the tree-replacement formula, more trees are found to be required. Site Lighting The proposed lighting plan complies with light-intensity maximum requirements. Staff has not seen a plan for the lighting fixture design details, however, there is only one pole light proposed on the south side of the parking lot. To comply with the ordinance, this fixture must not exceed a height of 25 feet and must be designed so the bulb and lens are not overly visible to the drivers and neighbors. Any building mounted lights should be attractive and designed so not to cause any excessive glare. Trash Storage There is a small trash enclosure in front of the building by the parking lot. Staff recommends a brick structure to be compatible with the building with an appropriately designed gate to also match the building. City Department Comments Enqineerinq Maplewood Staff Engineer, Jon Jarosch, reviewed this proposal and has submitted a report (see attachment). The main points unique to this site are that: . The developer is proposing to discharge their stormwater runoff on the adjacent property to the west by constructing a rainwater garden on that property. This adjacent property is owned by the same owner (the Mogren family) as the proposed office site. The runoff from the proposed site will be incorporated into the drainage plan for the site to the west when that property develops. Staff is recommending that the developer provide a deed restriction on the property to the west which would state that the rate control and volume reduction requirements for the office site be continually met on this abutting parcel. The city must assure this before a building permit will be issued. . The developer shall enter into a maintenance agreement, prepared by the city, for the rainwater garden and sump catch basin, also prior to getting a building permit. Buildinq Official Dave Fisher, Maplewood's Building Official, gave the following comments: . The city will require a complete building code analysis when the construction plans are submitted to the city for building permits. . All exiting must go to a public way. . The applicant must provide adequate fire department access to the building. . The building is over 2,000 square feet and is required to be fire sprinklered in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code #1306. . A preconstruction meeting is recommended with the building staff, contractor and project manager. 2 Police Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett reviewed this proposal and has no concerns. Fire Marshal Butch Gervais, Assistant Fire Chief and Fire Marshal, reviewed the proposal and requires the following be provided: . A fire protection system per code. . A fire alarm system per code. . A 20-foot-wide fire department access road. . A fire department key box (order from AC/FM). RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans date-stamped January 15, 2009, for the proposed Mogren Office Building. Approval is based on the findings for approval required by ordinance and subject to the developer doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the applicant has not obtained a building permit by that time. After two years this review must be repeated. 2. Comply with the requirements of the engineering report by Jon Jarosch dated January 12, 2009. The applicant shall submit the required agreements for runoff and rainwater garden maintenance as detailed in this report before getting a building permit. 3. Providing a revised/updated shared driveway-access agreement between the owner of the proposed site and the owner of the abutting property at 2607 White Bear Avenue. 4. Plantings in the rainwater garden shall be subject to the approval of Ginny Gaynor, the Maplewood Naturalist. 5. Provide a design plan for the trash enclosure for staff approval before getting a building permit. The trash enclosure shall be brick on all sides to match the building with a 100 percent opaque gate made of materials compatible with the building. 6. Provide a stop sign at the driveway exit onto White Bear Avenue. 7. The applicant shall install in-ground lawn irrigation in all landscaped areas. 8. The landscaping plan shall be revised for staff approval to include additional trees if, once the tree-replacement formula is applied, it is determined that additional trees are required. 9. All work shall follow the approved plans. The city planner may approve minor changes. 3 10. The proposed pole-mounted site light shall comply with the 25-foot height maximum. The proposed pole light in the parking lot shall be designed so the lens and bulb are recessed or shielded to avoid nuisance complaints. 11. Before obtaining a building permit, the applicant shall provide cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of completing landscaping and other site improvements. An irrevocable letter of credit shall include the following provisions: a. The letter of credit must clearly indicate that it is an irrevocable letter of credit in the name of the City of Maplewood, payable on demand, to assure compliance with the terms of the developer's agreement. b. The letter of credit must allow for partial withdrawals as needed to guarantee partial project payments covered under the terms of the letter of credit. c. The letter of credit shall be for a one-year duration and must have a condition indicating automatic renewal, with notification to the city a minimum of 60 days prior to its expiration. 4 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 13,150 square feet Existing Use: Undeveloped except for a shared driveway for the building to the north. SURROUNDING LAND USES North: David Hesley Accounting Office South: Office Building East: White Bear Avenue and Bachman's Nursery West: Undeveloped commercial property PLANNING Land Use Plan: BC (business commercial) Zoning: BC APPLICATION DATE The applicant's proposal was complete on January 15, 2009. State statute requires that the city make a decision on this request within 60 days. Under the provisions of state statute the deadline for completion of the city's review is March 16, 2009. p:sec11 \Mogren Office Building 2 09 te Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Site/Landscaping Plan 4. Building Elevations 5. Engineering Report dated January 12, 2009 6. Plans date-stamped January 15, 2009 (separate attachments) 5 G 0 n 0 ~ 0 m ~ ,. ~ ~ !!! !!! !!! Q 6? ~ o "- ill-' ~ , ";'./ ~ E7 ~~1 --2575 --- ~ ~ ~ IT:S"L-i' ~ I,;:} ~: ,~;; ; fi;, :;t "j- - I (" ~ I ., r' ,- - -' J ,', ',~.~ - ~., <.. . <0 "- Ji"~ l~.. ""',f.~(--(ltt'1'1"'~ H':'~\ '" ~ 0 " '< < r."",.",!", r ! r,;.,~ROI (" - ~- ['~~ ~ /" :~wi;L. A. 1 0 'I 1'1 JJ U n...., r' ,..1"' :"-C" . ,1796, '>i Ji1 .~ U L~ Jl.,_}'"'Jl, 'D[] ir. rL ~ ,,":1 W ~ ~ m CD ~ ~ o ~r-o OW ~ n ,..> KOHLMAN AVE "'" ::t ~ Olih ~ ........,..., ,,' L.J ~ Uo m ... "' ~~ o D ~ "j6j n "''t [:10 Q; !!! HlJ o f;;J ~.- ~ m ~ ~ ~ n o QD m !!! COUNTY ROAD C ~ ~ n c.> f1. ~ ~ !!![;J c-~ Proposed Site ,. /.{'1', \ ~'1~ \ Uol1I.;' ... .hl ,'d I , .i ~ ,( ~i p\"~ "! rern" ',I " ,I 1 ~ 1'1 L I" I Rainbow I ~ Foods , ~ r I " GERVAIS AVE ~~ :Q -/"., .~ G ~a: . :. ~ /', ..n .- r-;-..;..J r 1252. ~LJ , ,/' 2525 !canlJolJ !Coffee 2515 ~ - -" <C L.-r~f 0: MapJewood "C[' CO\IenantChun;h J:f /!! I CI {~ \-j;Hmonv Leaminq r'-j Cente~ I : l~ I L.-,__~ ~ !!! " 0 iAln l'l ~ LOCATION MAP I~ 'j I- ; U~' ; 1 i" :1'-0..>. ;;,~ij~D " ~ o rj "'<Il '0 ~ Q r r;; <C '1 /~ o -1 ,j~~~~~;;,~~~~.: { 1 'LJ' ~ D I' c _ n -v VH.fl<...."".lT;;,"""~'";" ;f:1~' ~~~ ~1i -.~ ~.. .t~;J .~ /_:r-i..r-" . ~'] r'1J' ~, l-l'itip1oW'><Jdi l~~,~,i ~ 1< ~ ~ ~ 11TH AVE 2440 Burger King [~7 ! I, !i~l ~5i ~"'~1i' Iji~ 1m; Ii, l,lo a::: . i iff' lou.le... q dl, d !:l i i I I, ,I ~! ~ ' , " I i ~l!lni~!lii!!i! ....!Ld~;<".p,! ~"iH!!I!p"," ~nll:ldllillll ~ 1 a 0 , " , . , I' ~ ! ~ ~ "" '% "'~ 1:-~ ~~~ ~w aa.. -r ":) So ~ f1 I "< ~'6 118~ .. <:6.\f>H~ ~ 7 !l!! ~glli ! ., , 'Ill' ; !!I!! Il ~~tS~ ~!; ~ - --- - ..lo!'l Iii l t -------- ------ --- ~ , " i o z 'i "' . o ! ''"r-cou - ...-....., ~ ,. "! '; a" .__-916.-.n.----~~,; u__.,_,......__~..... " !I ,/. :!W ,I! I I~~ ,.' ~', , , ' , "'''6-'- f: ,: I j' " i ~~ ~ i ~ ~::j~ ~ .\1 ~ ~ ~~ ~ - \'s l) ;:j ...ail: ~I~~~E ~'" ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~:~ z '" -~ >-", "<~ ~ iH ~ !;! ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ "," ", ;.1 '1'1. !, !~ b~ ~~~ ~~B'!(~~~ ~; ~ ~~ !~:E ;~ ~~ ~ ~~~SlS~~~:~* - ~ ~., ~~ ~~ ~.. ~~ n! ~i!nh! ~ Ii !!l~ !Il! 3 @ Ii! S @ ~ ~ ~ i;1!? !? !? '" >: . l ! , , , i~., E~:il ,-' ,Ii e!~ --------------- f , !l ';1 ~~ , '. ~I " /~:? ~~i l\~~ ".' ~~~ ,. 'I II . il~~ ~ ~ l.:~1l. ~ ~ 'II ~, '! . l~, !;l I,;, 2 Q ~ ~ .,...: .' ~ () ili; ~ ~~ I J~,~ ~ ~!I' 19", , ""1 l- iil!! ! ~5dl ~ i p:j" if}> w, ~: z- Oo We ~" p:j Q" Z, ~. ~ u :::! ~ ~i z <( ....J 0.. W ~ - (j) r--___.-_. 1 - 1 i 1 1 i 1 I I I i 1 i 1 I 1 1 i \ i 1 I, --- 1 \ 1 ' i\ 1\ ; -~----=--"--"-=- - ,,'- , , " 1 ", > . , , '~ II ',b ~+-, ;ji lo ~..~ o ii ~ " Q D~ P > C <( L HI kif --- ~ ~~ <0 dnud!\", v JOd 8 djl4M --- --- -r-- I -- I I I I I I I I I I I ~ :!i ~ i" ~ Jj " o " z ~ < < '" 1 l..!, I J.~~ l JJ " ' H! E ~.sJi~ .,'!;l.!!! -O13~ i;;'.C g~ 5.... 'C .., e:"E i3 ",l;;5}Lo'O)-<::>:l go U '-' l- '" 0 3 ." :.:> 9-:,:, .~-' ~1l 6~EGg5'L~ .Ii Q....o.3",:: e.s..... i '4: -3 i3 iil~ ~ ~ g w re 1 w_ !-~_~ '; ]~':- !H oS C$o",01~ oS ~~j;t~~l ~~H:a ~'i'! ~.;'l~~:U l/;' i ~;<~ d ~k[. !H~ :!i i'H Ji~{;:;:H:5;"JL!i{; ~ ee! ~~1~~a~ee~E I ,-- I ---__ I I I I I I I I I <0 I Ii", - lB l~!~~ ..r-''''t m ~~ifI (;1-1>- "- 0> 2 !l ]J!-.. I" ~~ j:j €e ~ I I I I I I , " . ~ 11<1' --,,~ :;;1 ;!I-_ .1 JI-;;h f w !'8 ~:Jf ~l .~<Il .!j ;:;: I I I I I I ~ l~ I L -+- m " ""\::- 'if: :g ~- L~ C . 11 ~ ~-~~ ~ r J~ ~ !i - in I... ~ 13 al-~ ~~~ .e~~ f Iii ft, 'f1.~_ i" " ] 11 ~ ~ Attachment 3 8 J ---- i" " 11 i" ~ .B i<i a ~ ~ ~ " " ~ a <0 -- z <( -.J a.. -(9 z - a.. <( o CJ) o z <( -.J - W r- CJ) I I I I I I I +---------,-,-,-,-- m . ,~' 9W H ,.1i DC '0 0 4e- ~~ ;:!.e w . , . , s . ~ . z . < z . ~ ~ w ~ ~ L . ~ ~ j , . . . . . ~ < W ~ q, If ~ ~ ffi . w . ~ t :>- z ~ g -a: < z o ;: ~ .. -l .. Iii < .. z o ;: ~ .. " .. ~ l- ~ o z z o ;: ~ .. " .. ~ :> o Ul Attachment 4 z o ;: ~ .. -l .. l- Ul .. ~ z o - I- ~ W ..J W <.9 z - o ..J - :::::> CO Attachment 5 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Mogren Commercial Office Building PROJECT NO: 09-01 REVIEWED BY: Jon Jarosch, Maplewood Engineering Department DATE: January 12th, 2009 Kelco Services is proposing to develop a lot between 2603 and 2607 White Bear Avenue. It is proposed that a commercial office building be constructed on this lot. The developer is proposing to manage stormwater runoff by constructing a rainwater garden on the adjoining property to the west. The following issues shall be addressed. Drainage 1. The swale from the parking lot to the west end of the property shall be replaced with a sumped catch-basin and piping. The piping should run from the sumped catch-basin to the proposed rainwater garden on the property to the west. This catch-basin shall have a 3-foot deep sump to capture sediment prior to discharge into the rainwater garden. 2, A deed restriction shall be obtained for Parcel 2, as shown on the provided land survey, and a copy provided to the City that states that the rate control and volume reduction requirements for Parcell shall be met in perpetuity on Parcel 2. 3. A soil boring shall be taken in the proposed rainwater garden location to ensure that runoff will infiltrate. If soils are found to not be conducive to infiltration, draintile shall be installed beneath the garden to ensure that the rainwater garden will drain down within 48 hours. 4. A rock,sump shall be installed in the rainwater garden to promote infiltration and shall be displayed in the plans. 5. Rainwater garden, rock-sump, and rip-rap construction details shall be included within the plan set. 6. An emergency overflow for the rainwater garden shall be displayed on the plans. Erosion and sediment control 1. The existing catch-basins on White Bear Avenue south ofthe site must be protected prior to any construction activities, Clearly show this protection on the plans. 2, Display a rock construction entrance location on the plans. 3. Street sweeping will be necessary to remove sediment along the joint entrance to the property as well as along White Bear Avenue. Please call out a street sweeping schedule in the plans. 4, Additional silt-fencing or bio-rolls are necessary and shall be clearly displayed on the plans. Silt-fencing is currently shown along the southern side of the property. It is also needed along the entire western end of the property as well as between the sidewalk removal area and White Bear Avenue. 5. Permanent stabilization blankets shall be placed at all emergency overflow swales to protect from erosion. 6. The rainwater garden and rock-sump must be protected during construction to prevent sedimentation. Utilities 1. The water service and connection must be approved by Saint Paul Regional Water Services. 2. The sanitary sewer service shown is 4"in diameter. The City requires a 6" ,minimum diameter for all commercial sites. Please modify the plans to display this requirement. 3. The sanitary sewer service shall be constructed with Schedule 40 PVC. Please clearly state this on the plans. 4. A Right,of-Way permit shall be obtained and a copy provided to the City for any intrusions into the White Bear Avenue Right-of-Way. The developer shall satisfy all requirements of the Right-of-Permit. Miscellaneous 1, "Sidewalk Closed" signs shall be placed on both sides of the sidewalk removal area while the construction makes this section of sidewalk unusable. A detour shall be provided to allow a safe route around the closed portion of the sidewalk. 2. The sidewalk shall be restored in like-kind after construction of the utility services has been completed. 3. Access to 2607 White Bear Avenue shall be maintained throughout construction. 4. The driveway entrance off of White Bear A venue shall be constructed to a minimum of24' width and shall comply with City of Maplewood standard plate 236. 5. Plans shall be submitted to Ramsey County for their review. 6. The developer shall enter into a maintenance agreement, prepared by the city, for the rainwater garden, and sump catch basin. 7. The developer and proj ect engineer shall satisfy the requirements of all other permitting agencies. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Linda Olson, Community Design Review Board Michael Martin, AICP, Planner 2008 Annual Report February 4, 2009 INTRODUCTION Attached to this memo is the draft of the community design review board's 2008 Annual Report. The CDRB has produced this report every year to forward on to the city council for its review of the board's work throughout the previous year, DISCUSSION The format of the 2008 Annual Report is similar to previous years, Staff has left the 2009 recommendations and goals section of the report blank, This was done with the intention of the CDRB having a discussion at its February 10, 2009 meeting to develop its goals for the upcoming year. RECOMMENDATIONS Please review the attached draft 2008 Annual Report and come to the February 10, 2009 meeting prepared to discuss goals for 2009. Attachments: 1. 2008 CDRB Annual Report 1 Attachment 1 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager Linda Olson, Community Design Review Board Chair 2008 Community Design Review Board Annual Report February 4, 2009 Type of Proposal # Reviewed INTRODUCTION Annually the community design review board (CDRB) reports the board's actions and activities for the city council for the previous year. In 2008, the CDRB reviewed the following 15 items during its 13 meetings: New Development Proposals 4 1. St. Paul's Monastery (2675 Larpenteur Avenue) 2. Trail's Edge Townhomes (2675 Larpenteur Avenue East) 3. Gethsemane Senior Housing (south of 2410 Stillwater Road) 4. T-Mobile Telecommunications Monopole (2220 Edgerton Street North) Expansions/Remodels 4 1. Salvation Army Addition (2080 Woodlynn Avenue) 2, Merit Chevrolet Building Remodel (2695 Brookview Drive) 3, St. John's Hospital Expansion (1575 Beam Avenue) 4. Menards Warehouse and Screening Fence (2280 Maplewood Drive) Miscellaneous Reviews and Actions 4 1, On-Site Dynamic Display Sign Code 2. Maplewood Mall Dynamic Sign 3. Heritage Square 5th Addition Design Modification (Highway 61 and County Rd D) 4. Legacy Shops at Legacy Village (County Road D) Type of Proposal, continued # Reviewed Special Proiects 3 1. 2007 Annual Report 2, Comprehensive Plan Update 3, Summer Tour Total 15 COMPARATIVE INFORMATION Year Number of Items Reviewed 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 25 25 27 33 27 15 MEMBERSHIP The CDRB consists of five members appointed by the city council. Membership terms are for two years, with extensions for additional terms approved by the city council. The current membership is as follows: Board Member Membership Beqan Term Expires Ananth Shankar 8/8/94 1/1/10 Matt Ledvina 3/10/97 1/1/11 Linda Olson 3/26/01 1/1/09 Matt Wise 2/12/07 1/1/10 John Demko 2/26/07 1/1/09 On February 25, 2008, the city council appointed Matt Wise and Ananth Shankar to two-year terms on the CDRB. The terms of Linda Olson, Matt Ledvina and John Demko officially expired on January 1, 2009, The council reappointed Matt Ledvina on January 26, 2009, whose membership will now end on January 1, 2011. Linda Olson and John Demko have yet to apply for reappointment. The city council will be looking to either reappoint the positions or seek new members, 2 DISCUSSION 2008 Actions/Activities In 2008, the CDRB saw its number of reviews drop to 15 items, almost half of what it reviewed in 2007. This is no doubt a reflection of the state of the economy and its affect on Maplewood. The Board reviewed two new housing projects that will work to increase housing options within the city, The two housing projects could add up to 159 new residential units, including 111 for senior housing, The Board also worked on several key commercial remodeling or expansion projects in the city, The CDRB has consistently demonstrated keen interest and skill in their reviews of these development projects to ensure they are of the quality of design and materials that complement the surrounding areas and improves a site's aesthetics. Another reason for the drop in reviews is that the city has seen the amount of vacant land available for new developments diminish. In addition, many of the projects that occurred in 2008 were smaller in nature allowing city staff to process many of the city's remodels and additions as 15-day reviews, as allowed by code, rather than the more formal review by the CDRB, Because of the developed nature of the city, many of the new commercial and residential developments reviewed by the CORB are either redevelopment of existing buildings or in-fill development. The CDRB will continue to be a vital advisory board to the city council in the future, particularly with more redevelopment and in-fill development projects on the horizon, The CDRB worked on updating the city's sign code in 2007. In 2008, the CDRB worked on implementing a dynamic display addition to the sign code, The city council adopted this addition in 2008. The CDRB worked on the comprehensive plan update that the city has been undertaking in 2008. The board specifically worked on the sustainability chapter and other design concerns for the plan. 2009 Recommendations/Areas of Interest TO BE DISCUSSED BY CDRB AT ITS FEBRUARY 10, 2009 MEETING, CONCLUSION In 2009, the CDRB will continue its dedication to the quality design of buildings and developments, ensuring a high quality of life for the citizens of Maplewood, P\com-dev\community design review board\annual report (2008) 3 MEMORANDUM DATE: Community Design Review Board Members Michael Martin, AICP, Planner Community Design Review Board Membership Reappointments and Election of Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson February 4, 2009 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION Linda Olson, Matt Ledvina and John Demko's terms officially expired on January 1, 2009. Matt Ledvina applied for reappointment and the council confirmed his reappointment at its meeting on January 26th, 2009. The other two board members have not sought reappointment at the date of this memo, Code states that members are to serve beyond the date of temn expiration until reappointment or a new appointment is made, The CDRB consists of five members appointed by the city council. Membership terms are for two years, with extensions for additional terms approved by the city council. The current membership is as follows: CURRENT MEMBERSHIP Board Member Membership Began Term Expires Ananth Shankar Matt Ledvina Linda Olson Matt Wise John Demko 8/8/94 3/10/97 3/26/01 2/12/07 2/26/07 1/1/10 1/1/11 1/1/09 1/1/10 1/1/09 The city code requires that the community design review board elect a chairperson and vice chairperson at the beginning of every year. The 2008 chairperson was Linda Olson and the vice- chairperson was Matt Ledvina. RECOMMENDATION Be prepared to discuss how the CDRB would like to handle electing a chairperson and vice chairperson for 2009. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Community Design Review Board Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner CDRB Rules of Procedure February 3, 2009 for the February 10 CDRB Meeting DISCUSSION Last year the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission adopted rules of procedure. The ENR used the existing rules of procedures from the Planning Commission, Community Design Review Board, and Housing and Redevelopment Authority as templates when drafting their rules, All of these rules of procedure require at least 48 hours notice prior to conducting a special meeting, During the city council's review of the ENR rules of procedure it was noted that the special meeting notification should be modified to ensure it meets the Minnesota Open Meeting Law, which requires at least 72 hours notice for special meetings (Attachment 1), In order to ensure consistency with state law, the special meeting notification requirements for all of the city's commission and board rules of procedure must be amended to reflect a 72 hour notice. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the changes proposed to the Community Design Review Board rules of procedure. This change will modify Section I.C, (Meetings) to be consistent with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law which requires at least 72 hours notice for special meetings. ' P:\com-dev\cdrb\rules\2M10-09 CDRB rules memo Attachments: 1. Minnesota Open Meeting Law 2. Community Design Review Board Rules of Procedure Attachment MINNESOTA STATUTES 2008 13D.04 13D.04 NOTICE OF MEETINGS. Subdivision 1, Regular meetings. A schedule of the regular meetings of a public body shall be kept on file at its primary offices. If a public body decides to hold a regular meeting at a time or place different from the time or place stated in its schedule of regular meetings, it shall give the same notice of the meeting that is provided in this section for a special meeting. Subd. 2. Special meetings. (a) For a special meeting, except an emergency meeting or a special meeting for which a notice requirement is otherwise expressly established by statute, the public body shall post written notice ofthe date, time, place, and purpose of the meeting on the principal bulletin board ofthe public body, or ifthe public body has no principal bulletin board, on the door of its usual meeting room. (b) The notice shall also be mailed or otherwise delivered to each person who has filed a written request for notice of special meetings with the public body. This notice shall be posted and mailed or delivered at least three days before the date of the meeting. ( c) As an alternative to mailing or otherwise delivering notice to persons who have filed a written request for notice of special meetings, the public body may publish the notice once, at least three days before the meeting, in the official newspaper ofthe public body or, if there is none, in a qualified newspaper of general circulation witllln the area ofthe public body's authority. (d) A person filing a request for notice of special meetings may limit the request to notification of meetings concerning particular subjects, in which case the public body is required to send notice to that person only concerning special meetings involving those subjects. (e) A public body may establish an expiration date for requests for notices of special meetings pursuant to this subdivision and require refiling of the request once each year. (t) Not more than 60 days before the expiration date of a request for notice, the public body shall send notice of the refiling requirement to each person who filed during the preceding year. Subd. 3. Emergency meetings. (a) For an emergency meeting, the public body shall make good faith efforts to provide notice of the meeting to each news medium that has filed a written request for notice ifthe request includes the news medium's telephone number. (b) Notice ofthe emergency meeting shall be given by telephone or by any other method used to notifY the members ofthe public body. (c) Notice shall be provided to each news medium which has filed a written request for notice as soon as reasonably practicable after notice has been given to the members. Copyright co 2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 2 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2008 13D.04 (d) Notice shall include the subject ofthe meeting. Posted or published notice of an emergency meeting is not required. ( e) An "emergency" meeting is a special meeting called because of circumstances that, in the judgment of the public body, require immediate consideration by the public body. (f) If matters not directly related to the emergency are discussed or acted upon at an emergency meeting, the minutes of the meeting shall include a specific description of the matters. (g) The notice requirement of this subdivision supersedes any other statutory notice requirement for a special meeting that is an emergency meeting. Subd. 4. Recessed or continued meetings. (a) If a meeting is a recessed or continued session of a previous meeting, and the time and place of the meeting was established during the previous meeting and recorded in the minutes of that meeting, then no further published or mailed notice is necessary. (b) For purposes of this subdivision, the term "meeting" includes a public hearing conducted pursuant to chapter 429 or any other law or charter provision requiring a public hearing by a public body. Subd. 5. Closed meetings. The notice requirements of this section apply to closed meetings. Subd. 6. State agencies. For a meeting of an agency, board, commission, or department of the state: (I) the notice requirements ofthis section apply only if a statute governing meetings of the agency, board, or commission does not contain specific reference to the method of providing notice; and (2) all provisions of thjs section relating to publication are satisfied by publication in the State Register. Subd. 7. Actual notice. If a person receives actual notice of a meeting of a public body at least 24 hours before the meeting, all notice requirements of this section are satisfied with respect to that person, regardless of the method of receipt of notice. History: 1957 c 773 s 1; 1967 c 462 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 654 s 15; 1973 c 680 s 1,3; 1975 c 271 s 6; 1981 c 174 s 1; 1983 c 137 s 1; 1983 c 274 s 18; 1984 c 462 s 27; 1987 c313 s 1; 1990 c 550 s 2,3; 1991 c 292 art 8 s 12; 1991 c319 s 22; 1994 c 618 art 1 s 39; 1997 c 154 s 2 Copyright ~ 2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Attachment 2 COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RULES OF PROCEDURE We, the members of the Community Design Review Board of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, created pursuant to Article IV, Section 25 of the Code of Ordinances, hereby adopt the following "Rules of Procedure," subject to the provisions of said Article, which is hereby made a part of these Rules: I. MEETINGS A. All meetings shall be held in the council chambers in Maplewood City Hall, 1830 E. County Road B, unless otherwise directed by the chairperson or staff, in which case at least 24 hours notice will be given to all members. B. Regular meetings shall be held at 6 p.m. on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each calendar month, provided that when the meeting falls on a legal holiday or voting day, such meeting shall be rescheduled. C. Special meetings may be held upon call by the chairperson, or in his/her absence, by the vice chairperson, or by any other member with the concurrence of two other members of the board with at least 48 72 hours notice to all members. II. QUORUM B. No standing or temporary committee shall have the power to commit the board to the endorsement of any plan or program without the express approval of the board. A. Three members of the board shall constitute a quorum. B. Any member who abstains from voting on a particular question because of possible conflict of interest shall not be considered to be a member of the board for the purpose of determining a quorum for the consideration of the issue. C. Any action by the board shall require a majority vote of the members present. III. DUTIES OF THE CHAIRMAN A. In addition to presiding at all meetings of the board, the chairperson shall appoint such standing committees and temporary committees as may be required, and such committees will be charged with the duties, examinations, investigations, and inquiries relative to subjects assigned by the chairperson, IV. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A. The chairperson, vice chairperson, and such officers as the board may decide are needed, shall be appointed by the board at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve until their successors have been duly elected and qualified, -1- B. In the absence of the chairperson, the vice chairperson shall perform the duties of the chairperson. In the event that both are absent, the members present shall elect a chairperson pro tem. V. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD VACANCIES A. The following are grounds for recommending to the city council the dismissal of a community design review board member: 1. Failure to serve, as shown by failure to attend six meetings in any calendar year, without good cause. 2. Resignation in writing. 3. Taking public office in Maplewood, 4. Moving out of Maplewood. A. In addition to carrying out the duties prescribed in city ordinance, the director or a designated replacement, shall: VI. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1, Prepare the agenda for each meeting. 2, Act as technical advisor to the board on any matter which comes before the board, 3. Make written recommendations to the board on matters such as, but not limited to, architectural plans, site plans, signage and landscaping proposals. 4, Inspect the construction of all projects approved by the board for plan compliance. 5, Schedule any matter with the city council that has been reviewed by the board that requires city council approval. VII. AGENDA A. Copies of the agenda, together with pertinent staff reports and copies of the minutes of the previous meeting, shall be made available to each member of the board not later than three days prior to the next scheduled meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Unfinished Business 6. Design Review B. The agenda format shall read as follows: ,2- 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Board Presentations 9. Staff Presentations 10. Adjournment C. The board shall only consider items on the agenda. D, The board's review shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following items: 1. Site Considerations: a. Utilities b. Drainage c. Landscaping - fence, screening d. Traffic flow, parking and driveway access e. Trash receptacle enclosure f. Building setbacks g, Security lighting h, Access for emergency vehicles 2. Architectural Considerations: a. Materials - compatible with neighboring buildings; such as block, metal, brick, etc., includin9 colors. b. Building aesthetics - compatible with neighboring buildings, scale of building, size in relation to surroundings, flat roof vs, pitched roof, etc. c. Location and concealment of outside equipment, e.g. air conditioning, and outside storage yards. VIII. AMENDMENT OR SUSPENSION OF RULES A, Any of the foregoing rules may be temporarily suspended by a majority vote of the members present. B. The "Rules of Procedure" may be amended at any regular meeting by a majority vote. IX. RULES OF ORDER Except as herein provided, Robert's Rules of Order, shall be followed. p:com'devlcommunity design review board/rules.drb Revised: June 2004 ,3,