Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05/11/2004
AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, May 11, 2004 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East 2. 3. 4. 5. Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Agenda Approval of the April 27, 2004, Minutes Design Review: a. Mounds Park Academy - 2051 Larpenteur Avenue b. Chesapeake Retail Center - 3091 White Bear Avenue Visitor Presentations: None Scheduled Board Presentations Staff Presentations: a. CDRB Representation at the May 24, 2004, City Council Meeting Adjourn II. III. IV. DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Longrie-Kline called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Diana Longrie-Kline Vice-Chairperson Ledvina Board member Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary APPROVALOFAGENDA Board member Ledvina moved to approve the agenda. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for March 29, 2004. Board member Ledvina would like to better clarify his intentions to the discussion on page 5, paragraph 5, after the third line it should state: The customer service portion of the building has a lower roof elevation than the rest of the building and is de-emphasized. This area should have a higher roof elevation in comparison to the rest of the building and this area should be the design focal point of the site. Board member Ledvina had another change on page 7 in the third bulleted motion. The strikes that are in bold should be removed from the sentences. The sentence should read: The applicant shall submit revised building elevations showing a different banding scheme on the south side of the building. This should be inserted on page 8 after the second paragraph before the motion was seconded. Board member Ledvina moved approval of the minutes of March 29, 2004, as amended. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes --- Ledvina, Olson, Shankar Abstention - Longrie-Kline The motion passed. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 2 V. DESIGN REVIEW a. Edina Realty - 2966 White Bear Avenue Ms. Finwall said Edina Realty is proposing to build a new 15,718-square-foot one-story office building to replace their existing office building for their business at 2966 White Bear Avenue. If approved the applicant would construct the new building in the parking lot east of their existing building and then tear down the existing office building to construct new parking. During the construction of the new building, Edina Realty will not have enough parking on their site. To ensure that they have parking, Edina Realty has arranged with Premier Bank at 2866 White Bear Avenue to use their parking lot. Once the contractor has finished the new office building, Edina Realty will move in, the contractor will demolish the existing building and then finish the new parking lot. Board member Ledvina asked if the planning commission would be reviewing this item? Ms. Finwall said this item requires only design review approval. Board member Olson asked if the proposed light poles are in excess of 25 feet? Ms. Finwall said the lighting plan specifies a light pole height of 25 feet and the intent is that the light pole plus the base meets that 25-foot height maximum. Board member Shankar asked if there was a curb cut on White Bear Avenue to make a left turn onto the property for southbound traffic? Ms. Finwall said the applicant is relocating the curb cut from the north portion of the property to the south. The Ramsey County Public Works Department has reviewed this and they indicate the new curb cut will not change the use of the site and is not anticipated to create operational problems on White Bear Avenue. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she noticed in the letter from Premier Bank that the parking agreement they have worked out is on a month-to-month basis due to the fact that the bank may have a project underway as well. She asked staff if they know when the Premier Bank project may start? Ms. Finwall said the city has received an application for a new Walgreen's to be located on that site which has to go through the city process and could take up to 60 days for approval. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked if staff saw an issue with the two projects being so close together and trying to share some of the same parking areas? Ms. Finwall said perhaps the applicant could answer that question. Board member Olson asked if there would be a retaining wall constructed as part of this project? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 3 Ms. Finwall said the engineering report specifies a retaining wall and the need for additional plans for the retaining wall. If the retaining wall is higher than 4 feet it requires a separate building permit. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked the applicant to address the board. Scott Wiestling, Architect with Finn Daniels Architects, 2145 Ford Parkway, Suite 201, St. Paul, addressed the board. He said there is a new driveway proposed off of White Bear Avenue. It will be a right in and right out for northbound traffic only. He said there is a retaining wall proposed at the north end of the site and the maximum height at any given point is 31~ feet. They are improving the quality of the storm water on the site that is being released into the local pond. They have some underground piping storage that is being proposed. There is an ecostorm septor, which is the structure underground that treats water before it is released into the pond. Eric Sjowall, Edina Realty, 2966 White Bear Avenue, St. Paul, addressed the board. He has been in touch with Premier Bank and they are setting up the parking on a month-to-month basis. He said Premier Bank would also accommodate parking for Edina Realty to the east of their bank once construction of the new Walgreen's begins. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked what parking needs Edina Realty has and whom will the parking be used by? Mr. Sjowall said the parking is needed for the real estate agents and the full-time staff. He said Edina Realty has closings at this location and the 22 parking spots in the front of their existing building will accommodate the public for those closings. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked if the applicant had any samples of building products to show the board? Mr. Wiestling said he brought building samples for the board to review. He said the darker color of brick is for the main part of the building and the lighter brick is the accent band that scores under and above the windows. The sample of metal is the proposed color of metal mansard for the majority of the window and the tower element by the entryway. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the board appreciates it when applicants bring building samples to the meeting to better visualize what the building would look like in the future. Board member Shankar asked what color the window frames and glass color would be? Mr. Wiestling said the glass color is a tinted bronze and the window frames are a dark bronze. Board member Olson asked what the tiny red band was on the color illustration of the building. Mr. Wiestling said that red band on the building is Edina Realty's trademark that is used on their newer buildings throughout the Twin Cities. Board member Olson asked why Edina Realty is reducing the square footage of their new building? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 4 Mr. Sjowall said the Maplewood Edina Realty office was originally constructed as the main building for St. Paul before other offices in surrounding cities opened like White Bear and Woodbury. As real estate and the agent count has changed, there are more real estate offices out there and the amount of space that is needed has become smaller, therefore, less square footage is needed. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said this proposal does not include approval of signage for the building. Any proposed signs would require a separate permit. She asked if they have any idea what the signs would look like? Mr. Wiestling said the intent is to relocate the existing monument sign along White Bear Avenue to the south side and the building would also have signage on the front facade of the building on the west elevation that fronts White Bear Avenue. He presented the board with a photo of the signage at their Stillwater location to represent how the signage would appear. Ms. Finwall said because of the way this property is zoned Edina Realty is limited to a freestanding sign of 80 square feet in size and one wall sign. Board member Olson asked what the reason was behind moving the curb entrance from the north end of White Bear Avenue to the south end? Mr. Wiestling said it just worked better for the layout of the new site design since the building was nestled into the northeast corner of the site; the main drive lane needed to be fronting that. They are also trying to orientate most of the entrances to the south instead of the north facade. Another reason is because of the Minnesota winter conditions and having sunshine at the entrance. Board member Olson asked if the city engineer was okay with this? It seemed White Bear Avenue is narrower at that point. Mr. Wiestling said that point has never come up in discussion with the city or in the staff report. Board member Ledvina asked if the applicant could relate the position of the proposed building to the neighboring properties to the north and south? Mr. Wiestling said the site plan that was submitted in the staff report shows the relationship of the two adjacent buildings with this proposed building. Board member Ledvina asked if the lot would have been vacant would they have done things differently? Mr. Wiestling said they did explore the possibility of tearing down the current building and shutting operations down for the summer but that wasn't feasible so they decided to keep their existing building in operation while constructing the new building. He said in a perfect world they would have put the building more towards the street. Board member Olson asked if the city engineer was okay with relocating the parking entrance from the northern part to the southern part of the property? Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 5 Ms. Finwall said she could only refer to the engineering report, which does not reflect any comment or concerns on that driveway access. The county engineering report reflects the location of the driveway as being acceptable. Board member Olson said she would like the city engineer to review the driveway access. The Great Moon Restaurant is to the south and is very busy and the traffic is heavy there. She is concerned about the two entrances being so close together and thinks it could be a potential safety issue. Board member Ledvina said he could see the functionality of a one-story building as it fits more in the character of the surrounding buildings. Overall he thinks the layout is good. His preference would be to bring the entrance right up to the southwest corner, although he respects Edina Realty's desire to have the entrance where it is shown on the plans. He would like to see additional landscaping added around the dumpster area to improve the look. Board member Olson asked if they chose that block for the retaining wall so it matches Michael's retaining wall and if it would be the same size? Mr. Wiestling said they chose the retaining wall block because it would match the colors of the banding for the building they are proposing and the block size will be the same size, Board member Shankar said the illustration shows some red used in some of the window frames. He wondered if they ever considered using forest green like the roof color for the window frame color? Mr. Wiestling said they considered using the forest green but decided to use the dark bronze window frame because it is a better accent color next to the red and it blends together better. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she thinks this is a nice looking building and she likes the fact that it has a lot of windows. She's glad they have the parking issues worked out which is important when you are working around an existing building. She agrees having additional plantings around the dumpster area is a good idea. When the rest of the property is going to look so nice it would be a shame to have the dumpster be such an eyesore. Board member Shankar asked if you would be able to see the downspout from the street? Mr. Wiestling said no but you may see it from the parking lot at Michael's depending on how tall the trees are. Board member Olson asked if the storm water would be routed into the pond? Mr. Wiestling said yes. They applied for a permit at the Watershed District and received approval at their April 7, 2004, meeting with four conditions. Mr. Wiestling said the largest condition was to increase the piping size underground to retain more water on site and slow the discharge rate down. The plans have already been revised to reflect that change. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 6 Board member Ledvina moved to approve the plans date-stamped March 10, 2004, for the proposed Edina Realty building at 2966 White Bear Avenue. This approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: (additions to the motion are in bold) Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the city issues a grading permit or a building permit: Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, retaining wall, tree, and driveway and parking lot plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. These shall include the normal water elevation and 100- year high water elevation. (b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. The ponds or basins shall meet the city's design standards and shall include best management practices and rainwater gardens wherever practical. (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" native vegetation rather than using sod or grass. (e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city. (f) Show as little disturbance as possible on the north, south and east sides of the site to minimize the loss or removal of the trees. This is to keep and protect as many of the trees along the north, south and east property lines as possible. (3) All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter. (4) The driveways shall meet the following standards: Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 7 (a) 24-foot width--no parking on either side and 28-foot width--parking on one side. The developer or contractor shall post the driveways with no parking signs to meet the above-listed standards. The developer shall disturb as little as possible of the area along the north, south and east property lines. Change the grading plan for this part of the site as recommended by the city engineer. (6) A storm water management plan including drainage and ponding calculations, for the proposal. (7) Make all the changes and meet all the conditions noted by Erin Laberee in the memo dated March 30, 2004. Submit a landscape irrigation plan to staff showing the location of sprinkler heads. c. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction. d. Submit a revised landscape plan for city staff approval showing: (1) As much of the existing vegetation (including large trees) remaining along the northern, southern and eastern property lines as possible. (2) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. The native grasses and flowering plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance. Specifically, the developer or contractor shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate. (3) The location of all large trees on the site. (4) In-ground landscape irrigation system for all new landscaping. (5) The applicant shall increase the landscaping in the vicinity of the trash enclosure. e. Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district. fo The fire chief shall approve the access to the back (north side) of the building for firefighting needs. g. Get the necessary approvals and permits from Ramsey County. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 8 Submit elevations and plans for city staff approval for the outdoor trash or recycling containers and enclosures. The enclosure shall have materials that are compatible with the building, and it shall have gates that are 100 percent opaque. Provide design details (height, depth and materials) and the proposed retaining wall. Submit material samples and color schemes for the building to city staff for approval. A letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements and for the removal of the existing office building. The amount of the escrow shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the new building: a. Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Install a handicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space and an address on the building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs within the site, as required by staff. Construct the trash enclosure to meet code requirements, unless the trash is stored indoors. The enclosure must match the materials and colors of the building and shall have a 100 percent opaque gate. e. Install continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways. Install and maintain an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all new landscaped areas. Paint any rooftop mechanical equipment to match the uppermost part of the building. (code requirement) ho Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties. i. The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. (2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. Community Design Review Board 9 Minutes 4-27-2004 (3) Remove any debris or junk and the existing office building from the site. (4) Install the curb and gutter, parking lot and retaining wall as shown on the project plans. 4. Remove the existing office building within 30 days of occupying the new office building. 5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping 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. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. 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 before the installation or relocation of signs. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. be Van Dyke Village - 2191, 2201, 2211, 2231 Van Dyke Street North (Requested Amendment to May 27, 2003, Community Design Review Board Conditions) Ms. Finwall said Mr. Bruce Mogren is requesting that the community design review board (CDRB) reconsider the condition to add brick wainscoting on the east elevations of the Van Dyke Village Town Houses located at 2191,2201,2211, and 2231 Van Dyke Street North. During the May 27, 2003, CDRB meeting, the board felt that brick wainscoting would accentuate the architecture of the town houses. The board determined that the best location for the brick would be on the east elevations, toward Van Dyke Street. A condition was added to the design review approval which states that brick wainscoting will be installed from the ground grade to the bottom of the windows on the entire east elevations and in front of bedroom number two in all unit A style town houses (end units) starting from the porch railings to the end of the building. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 ]0 Because of budget constraints Mr. Mogren requests the exclusion of the brick wainscot in order to help finance upgrades he is planning on making and to keep the rent of the units at an affordable workforce rate. In place of the brick wainscot, Mr. Mogren is proposing to add shrubs along the east elevation, which would grow to the height of the proposed wainscoting. Board member Ledvina asked if staff had calculated the actual amount of square feet of brick the board has requested? Ms. Finwall said no. Board member Shankar asked if these are market rate town houses or subsidized town houses? Ms. Finwall said perhaps the applicant could explain the type of housing and the percentage of subsidized housing. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Bruce Mogren, 1801 Gervais Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the board. He said this is workforce housing where the income level is restricted and the rent he can charge is restricted. The break down is 75% of the units or 15 of the units are workforce housing and 5 of the units are market rate. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked Mr. Mogren if he knew how much the brick was going to cost to add to the buildings? Mr. Mogren said he estimates the cost to be about $11,000-$12,000. Typically he would not be too concerned about the additional cost of the brick but as he is learning more about this type of housing and the constraints, he understands how tight the budget is for workforce housing. He said he is already working on adding the items shown in the staff report regardless of the board's decision to eliminate the brick or not. Eliminating the brick would give him additional money to use on different areas for this project. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said as Mr. Mogren is learning more about building this type of project and the constraints, she asked if this was his first experience with workforce housing? Mr. Mogren said yes. He said he has done close to 300 units for senior housing and the needs are very different. He said along the way he has been receiving tips on what to do for the project. Board member Ledvina asked if Mr. Mogren had calculated the total square feet of brick to be added to the buildings? Mr. Mogren said no he had not. He is basically trying to redirect the dollars used on this project the best way he can. Board member Ledvina asked what the total dollar amount of the project was? Mr. Mogren said this project was going to cost about $2.5 million dollars. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 Board member Olson said she remembered Mr. Mogren had objected to the board's request to add brick to the buildings the last time this project was reviewed. One of the concerns the board had was when you have kids living in these buildings the exterior is going to take abuse which was one of the purposes to require the brick. She asked if the siding had a resistance strength rating? Mr. Mogren said he did not know the resistance strength rating but this product was a significant upgrade from other projects. He said originally they looked at using steel siding but decided against it because steel dents. His intention has always been to use the best products for the long run. According to the rules he has to own this building for a minimum of 15 years so he wants the building to look nice and have Iow maintenance. But because it's workforce housing he can't charge over a certain amount of rent and he's trying to do the best he can with the project and the money he has to work with. Board member Olson said in Mr. Mogren's letter he talked about replacing the cost of the brick with landscaping and the addition of security lights and front security doors. She thought things like bedroom ceiling lights; security lighting and doors would have already been built in as part of this project? Mr. Mogren said they had planned on using sliding doors but now they are going to use a solid core door for safety reasons. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the board had concerns at the previous meeting regarding the children living in these buildings and the durability of the siding. That is the reason they recommended putting brick on the building exterior to begin with. A brick exterior will help with the longevity of the exterior appearance from the impact of children living there and it will also have a better impact on the surrounding neighborhood. She is having a difficult time trying to imagine how landscaping would help the appearance of the exterior in place of using brick. Landscaping is also a maintenance issue with the wear and tear from children playing. Bushes and landscaping can also become a trash collector. Mr. Mogren said he has a real pride of ownership at his properties. With his six maintenance people that take care of his other properties he assured the board that trash would not be an issue. Basically he said he was appealing to the board because he was looking for a financial break. He said it did not appear to him that using landscaping instead of adding the brick on the building would be that significant to the board. But if the board feels it is necessary then he will end up doing whatever they direct him to do in the end. Either way he believes this development will turn out nice and will be just as nice as any of the homes in the neighborhood. Board member Olson asked if she heard correctly that the brick ledges were already built into the building? Mr. Mogren said correct, just in case the board said he had to put the brick on the building he made sure the brick ledge was built. Otherwise it would have been to late to go back and add the brick to the exterior. Community Design Review Board :t2 Minutes 4-27-2004 Board member Shankar said to clarify that means the foundation had to be built out an additional four inches to accommodate the brick addition. In his opinion the project is half way there so he may as well go forward with installing the brick. Mr. Mogren said he has been working with the builder and the city as a team and the board will decide what he has to do with this project. Board member Olson said she wasn't aware there wouldn't be any shrubs in this location if the brick was put on the exterior. Board member Ledvina said the board had a significant discussion about this project and felt it was important to improve the building exterior appearance from Van Dyke Street. The homes across the street are brick homes and that was another reason the board thought the building would fit in better. To add the brick onto the building exterior is less than a half a percent of the total building cost and he believes the brick needs to be put on the exterior. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she remembers the discussion about why it was important to have the brick on the building exterior and she believes the board should stick with their original motion to keep the brick. The board put a lot of thought and discussion into this issue and in the long run it will be better for the appearance and longevity of the building. Board member Ledvina moved to make no revisions to the May 27, 2003, community design review board conditions as follows: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the city issues a building permit: a. Have the city engineer approve the final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, drainage, sidewalk, utility, driveway, parking lot and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with the city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. These shall include the normal water elevation and 100- year high water elevation. (b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 13 (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" vegetation rather than using sod or grass. (e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city. (f) Show as little disturbance and tree removal as possible on the north, west and south sides of the site (near the businesses and the daycare center). (3) The tree plan shall: (a) Be approved by the city engineer before site grading or tree removal. (b) Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. In addition, this plan shall show the planting of at least 15 replacement trees on the site. (c) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (d) Be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans. (4) The design of the rainwater gardens shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responsible for getting any needed off-site grading or drainage easements and for recording all necessary easements. (5) All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter. (6) The driveways shall meet the following standards: 24-foot width--no parking on either side and 28-foot width--parking on one side; the developer or contractor shall post the driveways with no parking signs to meet the above-listed standards. (7) The developer shall disturb as little as possible of the area along the north, west and south property lines near the daycare center and businesses and the applicant shall change the grading plan for this part of the site as recommended by the city engineer. Submit an in-ground lawn-irrigation plan to staff showing the location of sprinkler heads. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 14 c. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction. d. Submit a revised landscape plan for city approval showing: (1) As much of the existing vegetation (including the trees) remaining along the northern, westerly and southerly property lines as possible. (2) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. This shall include planting (instead of sodding) the disturbed areas around the rainwater gardens with native grasses and native flowering plants. The native grasses and flowering plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance. This is to reduce maintenance costs and to reduce the temptation of mowers to encroach into the gardens. Specifically, the developer shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate. (3) Foundation plantings near and around the buildings and additional landscaping (with trees and other materials) between the proposed buildings and Van Dyke Street. (4) The in-ground lawn-irrigation system. e. Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district. Submit a revised site lighting plan for city approval. This plan shall show how the lighting on the buildings would add to the site lighting, and the plan should have additional lighting near the tot lot and driveways, where they intersect the public street, so the driveways are adequately lit. This plan also shall show details about the proposed light fixtures to ensure they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to property shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent residential properties. g. The developer shall record the following with Ramsey County: (1) 10-foot-wide drainage and utility easements for the areas along the east and west property lines and five-foot-wide drainage and utility easements for the areas along the north and south property lines. (2) The documentation to combine the properties into one property for tax and identification purposes. Have the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) approve the proposed utility plans. The fire chief shall approve the access to the back (north and south side) of the buildings for firefighting needs. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 15 Submit plans for city staff approval for any outdoor trash or recycling containers and enclosures. If the developer wants to build such facilities, the enclosure shall have materials that are compatible with the buildings, and they shall have gates that are 100 percent opaque. A letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. Submit for city approval revised building plans and elevations that include brick wainscoting to be installed from the ground grade to the bottom of the windows on the following locations of all town house buildings: Entire east elevations and in front of bedroom #2 in all unit A style town houses (end units) starting from the porch railings to the end of the building. In addition, the revised plans should show an alternate porch railing material than the proposed natural cedar (i.e., cedar painted white to match the window trim or white aluminum railings). Submit for city staff approval building elevations and plans for the maintenance/caretaker building. This building shall have materials and colors consistent with the main buildings on the site. no The developer shall close on the purchase of the property with the city before the city will issue a grading or a building permit for the project. Complete the following before occupying the buildings: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Install reflectorized stop signs at each exit, a handicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space and an address on each building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs within the site, as required by staff. Paint any rooftop mechanical equipment to match the uppermost part of the building. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent property. (code requirement) Construct trash dumpster and recycling enclosures as city code requires for any dumpsters or storage containers that the owner or building manager would keep outside the building. Any such enclosures must match the materials and colors of the building. Install and taper the concrete sidewalk along Van Dyke Street to match the driveways. Install and maintain all required landscaping and an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas. (code requirement) Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 Install continuous concrete curb and gutter along all interior driveways and around all open parking stalls. Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to property shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and the nearby homes and residential properties. Install a six-foot-high solid screening fence or additional landscaping along the entire south property line and on a portion of the west property line starting from the tree line (i.e., preserved trees) to the north property line. Install additional landscaping along the north property line. These additional materials are to ensure there is at least six-foot-tall, 80 percent opaque screen on these sides of the site. The location, design and materials of the fence or the additional landscaping shall be subject to city staff approval. k. The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. (2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. (3) Remove any debris or junk from the site. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping 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. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. 5. This approval does not include the signs. o All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 17 VI. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Councilmember Will Rossbach said the city council meeting April 26, 2004. Because the city council assigned contact people for the various commissions so he thought this would be a good opportunity to stop by and introduce him as their contact. If the board has any questions he is here to answer questions if he can. The things the city council has tried to do will supply more people to serve on the boards and commissions. This will provide better communications between the city council and the commissions, therefore, the commissions will have a better understanding of what the city council is trying to accomplish. Board member Olson said she would like to thank Councilmember Rossbach for coming to the meeting tonight. In the three years she has been on the board there have been no other city councilmember that has come to a board meeting. She is curious about the change in procedure for appointing members for the committees. She just received her letter in the mail today and she is confused about the fact that the board has been removed from the process of selecting or recommending a member to serve on a board or commission and wondered if Councilmember Rossbach could explain the reason for the change. Councilmember Rossbach said the city did a survey of surrounding cities and found out that Maplewood is the only city where the commissions and boards appoint their own members. The process to have current board or commission members reapply is to ensure they're still interested. It also gives applicants the perception that there is a possibility they could be appointed. Many of the commissions are currently looking for new members but in the past it had been years before there was an opening for new members. It wasn't the council's intent to set up any type of rotation to take place but they did want everybody to think and reflect if indeed they want to remain on the commission or board or are they interested in either moving on or doing something else and step aside for others to take their place. The city expects they will receive more applicants because they will feel there will be a greater opportunity for an opening on the board or commission. Basically it is better for recruiting applicants. This is the format the city council wants to pursue at this time. If this process doesn't work then they will make changes. In the past the board or commission voted for the applicants during the interview process and their score and who voted for which applicant was very public. It wasn't uncommon for the applicant with the lower scores to drop out of the interview with the city council. Councilmember Rossbach said the city council may also want to recommend an applicant for a different commission or board that may better fit their qualifications where there is an opening. The new process is not to force a commissioner or board member to leave, in fact the city wants more people on the commissions and boards and wants to attract applicants. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the question many of the board members have is why do they have to reapply every year? That means you are having to review each application for current commission and board members every year. What if there is a board or commission member and a new applicant applying for the same position? She asked what criteria had been established and in place to decide whom the city council would select so it is an objective standard and not subjective. She asked if a current member has the experience that is needed but there is an applicant from the outside that the city council wants on the commission or board how is that decision going to be made? Community Design Review Board 18 Minutes 4-27-2004 Councilmember Rossbach said he is not sure how that would be decided. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked Mr. Rossbach if he understood the legal ramifications of that? Councilmember Rossbach said no he did not. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said there should be some kind of objective standard of which the council judges the applicants then because each board member and commission member has to reapply each year and there are new applicants wing for the opening. Councilmember Rossbach said he didn't think it was the intention of the city council to create new openings each year. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said that is what would happen though. Councilmember Rossbach said he didn't think so. He said that may be Ms. Longrie-Kline's interpretation but that was not the intention of the city council. Board member Ledvina said he believed the board had two-year terms. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said with the new policy a person would have to reapply each year. Ms. Finwall said the time line to be on a board or commission is two years with staggered terms. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the policy on the website stated you had to reapply each year. Councilmember Rossbach said that was the last version but has been revised to require commission or board members to reapply when their term expired. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she doesn't have a current copy of the policy with her and perhaps it was a misunderstanding but last week Karen Guilfoile from the city clerk's office told her to look on the website for the new policy, which she did. Board member Olson said today she received in the mail the new policy and it does not state anywhere in the letter that you have to reapply each year. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she had not read her mail yet today but when she got home she would look for the letter. Board member Olson read from the letter "Chair appointments would be made every 2 years starting in 2005 by the city council. The city council would not impose term limits, however, they will make annual appointments or reappointments through an open or community wide process and each year every commissioner seeking reappointment will reapply." Chairperson Longrie-Kline said it should not say "annual" in the policy then. Board member Olson said annually the city council would make appointments to fill vacancies. Community Design Review Board Minutes 4-27-2004 VII. VIII. Councilmember Rossbach said he did not come to make this into a debate. He said it is not the intention of the city council to force anybody off the commission or board it is an effort to recruit more applicants and to have better communication with the commissions. The term "liaison" was going to be used and that did not sit well with people so the name was changed to "contact person." The city council wants the boards and commissions to know if there is something you want to get to the city council you may contact their council representative and bring the item up so it could possibly be brought up for discussion at the council meeting. That is what the contact person is for, sort of the middle person. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she thinks she speaks for all the board members when she says they are all pleased to have Councilmember Rossbach as their contact person. Board member Olson said the board serves at the pleasure of the city council and the board members are appointed. She appreciates that and feels honored to be on the CDRB. She asked Councilmember Rossbach if he had any comments on how the board is serving as a committee or regarding any decisions the board made tonight? Mr. Rossbach said he would not be able to comment on how the board is doing as a committee because he doesn't have enough information. However, he thinks the city looks nice and that is a good reflection on the board. The board makes recommendations to the city council, which the council listens to and decides to vote on for their final decision. Chairperson Longrie-Kline thanked Councilmember Rossbach for coming to the board meeting and welcomed him to attend more board meetings. Councilmember Rossbach welcomed any board member to e-mail him at home because his e- mail is now working. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she encourages the word to be spread that if people are interested in landscape and building design elements to read the packets on the internet and are welcome to attend board meetings to see how the CDRB works. BOARD PRESENTATIONS Board member Olson was at the last city council meeting where they discussed Venburg Tire, and the city council took the board's recommendation and the item passed. After the city council meeting the Venburg applicants came and personally thanked her for taking a stance on their development and the financial situation they are under having to move across the highway. The issue of financial consideration is a concern of hers and she hopes she did not start something after her stance with Venburg Tire. That was an individual case where Venburg Tire is not getting any additional funding or subsidies. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Update on the City Council's Community Design Review board Candidate Interviews Community Design Review Board 20 Minutes 4-27-2004 Ms. Finwall said there were 3 candidates that were interviewed at the April 26, 2004, city council meeting. Ms. Longrie-Kline attended that meeting and Ms. Finwall said she would turn the discussion over to her for further information. Ms. Longrie-Kline said prior to the workshop she had suggested about eight different questions to be asked of the applicants. During the interview process six of her questions were used along with two other questions. Each candidate was asked the same questions in the same order so their answers could be compared as well as their background. The city council selected Judy Driscoll to serve on the board. She is from the Gladstone area and she has a good background in design review, landscaping, and interior background. She is also familiar with site plans and reading elevations. The second runner up was Richard Currie. Ms. Finwall said she would contact Ms. Driscoll and congratulate her and find out when she would be coming to her first board meeting. The next board meeting is Tuesday, May 11, 2004. IX. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Robeds, Planner Land Use Plan Change, Conditional Use Permit Revision and Design Review Mounds Park Academy 2051 Larpenteur Avenue May 4, 2004 INTRODUCTION Project Description Mr. David Aune, representing Mounds Park Academy, is proposing several changes for Mounds Park Academy at 2051 Larpenteur Avenue. (See the statement on page 16, the location and property line maps on pages 17 and 18 and the other maps on pages 19 - 31 .) Requests To make the changes to the site and the school, Mr. Aune is asking that Maplewood approve: 1 .A land use plan change for two adjacent residential properties on Larpenteur Avenue. This change would be from R-1 (single dwellings) to S (school). Please see the maps on pages 18 and 19. The revision is for the site expansion, the revised parking lot and driveway plans and for the proposed building additions. (See the maps on pages 21 - 24.) 2.A conditional use permit (CUP) revision. The Maplewood City Code requires a CUP for schools in any location. (Refer to the applicant's statement on page 16.) 3. The design plans for the project, including the site, building and landscaping plans. BACKGROUND (Recent Actions) On January 8, 2001, the city council approved a revision to the CUP for Mounds Park Academy. This approval was for the school to build an addition between their existing building and the former school distdct building at 1801 Beebe Road. On January 14, 2002, the city council reviewed the CUP for Mounds Park Academy. The city council required a review in one year to allow Mounds Park Academy to complete construction of the addition and install all required landscaping. On January 27, 2003, the city council again reviewed the CUP for Mounds Park Academy. The city council agreed to review the CUP again only if a problem adses or if the school proposed a revision to the CUP or an expansion. On September 22, 2003, the city council approved a request from the school for up to $4.7 million in tax-exempt revenue note financing. The school planned to use this financing to pay off existing revenue bonds, to cover the costs of recent projects and to buy property. DISCUSSION Land Use Plan Change To build the expanded parking lot and revised driveways, Mr. Aune wants the city to change the land use plan for two adjacent properties on Larpenteur Avenue. This change would be from R-1 (single dwellings) to S (school). (See the existing land use plan map on page 19.) Land use plan changes do not require specific findings for approval. Any change, however, should be consistent with the city's land use goals and policies. There are several goals in the Comprehensive Plan that apply to this request. They include: Provide for orderly development. Minimize conflicts between land uses. Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers. · Transitions between distinctly diffedng types of land uses should not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments. · The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. · Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate buffedng and separation. Compatibility Staff does not find a problem with this proposal in terms of compatibility and land use. The proposed parking lot expansion would be near Larpenteur Avenue and next to the rear yards of several single dwellings. As proposed, the new parking lot and ddveway will be at least 20 feet away from the west property line. In addition, the school will screen the new parking lot from the yards of the houses with a solid screening fence and landscaping. Conditional Use Permit Revision As noted in the school's statement of intended use of the property (page 16), they are proposing to expand their campus and facilities in three phases. If approved by the city, the school would complete Phase 1 this summer. This work would include the expansion and reconfiguration of the parking lot in the front (south side) of the school, including moving the main entrance to the west side of the site. The school then expects to start the construction of Phase 2 of the plan in 2005. The major elements on this work would involve the building of the classroom addition and the field house on the north side of the existing school. As outlined in their statement, the school would hope to proceed to building the Phase 3 projects in 2008 or later as their funding would allow. This work would include cafeteria and kitchen remodeling, a relocated main entryway and the expansion of the library. The proposed school building additions and parking lot expansion will meet the city's findings of approval for a conditional use permit. As the school also noted in their use statement, they now 2 have about 700 students and 125 staff (a total of 825). The school expects that with the additions and remodeling that those numbers would grow to 790 students and 135 staff for a total building population of 925 people. The increase of 100 people on the campus should not pose a problem for the neighbors or cause additional traffic issues on the nearby streets. Parking, Site Access and Vehicle Circulation With up to 135 staff persons and up to 790 students (with a maximum of 200 that can drive to school), the existing and proposed parking lots should be adequate to handle the parking needs of the school. There are now about 264 total parking spaces on the site. The proposed plans show 343 parking spaces on the school property after the completion of their projects. There would be about 249 spaces in the lots to the south and west of the building and the other 94 spaces would be behind (to the north and east) of the field house. The project architect calculated that together, if full, the school theater and the field house would need about 475 parking spaces. As I noted above, the plans show 343 total parking spaces on the site after completion. As such, the school should not have major functions in both of these parts of the building at the same time as they will not have enough parking on their site. The proposed project plans show the main entrance and exit for the school shifted to a point 28 feet from the new west property line of the site. For reference, the code requires at least a 20- foot setback from the residential property line for this driveway. This plan shows three lanes for vehicles - one for entering the property, one for turning left and one for turning right when leaving the school. Because of this design, it will be important for the school to screen the driveway and parking areas from the houses to the west. The school is proposing to extend the same type of wood privacy fence along all of the west property line from the opening at Price Avenue to the south. The city should require the school to post all the driveways for no parking to ensure that there would not be cars parked in areas that would hinder site access and vehicular circulation. This plan also keeps a single-lane entry into the school near the location of the existing entrance and exit. This would be primarily for busses and for the dropping off or the pick-up of students. The plans also show the removal of the existing parking area that is in front of the building and east of the existing entrance. The school intends to use this new green space as an outdoor play and educational area. Traffic A concern of several of the neighbors near the site is the increase in traffic the school could bring to the area. The county designed and built Larpenteur Avenue as a minor arterial street. It currently carries about 10,000 vehicles per day between White Bear Avenue and McKnight Road. In the area by the school, Larpenteur Avenue has two traffic lanes and a striped parking or bike lane on each side of the street. The city has designated Beebe Road as a collector street. These roads are to move traffic from neighborhoods and businesses to arterial streets and highways. Having a driveway from the school property onto Beebe Road is consistent with this designation and purpose. City staff had Dan Soler, the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer, review the proposed plans for Mounds Park Academy. (See Mr. Soler's comments on pages 35 and 36.) He noted that the proposed plans should not impact traffic operations along Larpenteur Avenue and that the improvements will likely improve traffic operations in the area, including the traffic flow to and from the school. City staff estimates that the school, with a maximum building population of 925 (students and staff), (if approved by the city), would add up to 200 more vehicle trips per day to Larpenteur Avenue. These trips would be divided primarily between the morning and the afternoon as parents drop off and pick up students and as the staff goes to and from work. Both the city and county engineer told me that this proposal would not cause traffic problems or add enough additional traffic to exceed the capacity of Larpenteur Avenue. Life Safety and Building Code Concems Butch Gervais, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, had several comments about the proposal. They included that he will require upgrading the fire protection and emergency lights and exits for the school and these must be continued into the new building additions. David Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, also has comments and corrections that the school will need to address. They include meeting the requirements of the accessibility code (parking, providing access routes and possibly changing the bathrooms), that there may be a need for additional fire walls in the school and that the building must have a fire sprinkler system throughout the building. Mr. Fisher also recommended that the architect, contractor and city staff have a pre-construction meeting. It is important to note that the city will require building permits for any remodeling of the existing space and that the city will not allow the school to occupy the building until the minimum life safety and building code standards are met. In addition, one should remember that the school is asking for a land use approval and that building code and life safety issues are typically reviewed and handled by city staff after the city council acts on the conditional use permit request. Furthermore, the city council would annually review the conditional use permit to check on the school, its compliance with the conditions and any issues or matters that may arise. Public Utilities There are sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water in Larpenteur Avenue that serve the school. Specifically, the city designed and built the storm sewer in Larpenteur Avenue to accommodate drainage from a large area north of Larpenteur Avenue. The developer's plans will connect their pipes to the existing storm and sanitary sewer pipes. Watershed District The Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District has reviewed the current proposal and has issued the school a permit. (See their permit comments in the memo on page 34.) Drainage Concerns Two of the neighbors of the school on Ruth Street expressed concern over the potential for increased runoff and flooding due to this project. The city should require that the grading/drainage plan would not increase the storm-water flow onto any neighbor's land. As proposed, the plans do not show any grading or site changes within about 20 feet of the edge of the existing ponding area. In fact, the plans show the school moving the north edge of the existing parking lot 10 feet to the south so it would be farther from the edge of the existing pond. The city engineering department review also raised several concerns about the shape and function of the proposed ponding areas. (Please see the comments from Chuck Vermeersch and Chds Cavett, starting on page 32.) The project plans show a six-foot-tall vinyl coated chain link fence around the new pond near Larpenteur Avenue. 4 Design Review Building Design The proposed building additions would be attractive and would fit in with the design and materials of the existing school. The classroom additions would have an extedor of face bdck to match the existing school bdck while the field house would have walls of precast concrete panels with 1 inch reveals and windows. As proposed, the field house would have a lobby area with aluminum and glass curtain walls. (See the elevation on page 31 and the project plans.) Tree Removal/Replacement and Landscaping The proposed plans show the removal of 69 large trees (ash, oak, maple and elm), primarily from the back yards of the two houses on Larpenteur Avenue. The plans also show the school keeping many of the existing trees around the perimeter of the site and near the existing pond. (As a point of clarification, the developer would remove more than 69 trees. Other than the 69 quality trees, the applicant would remove many box elder and cottonwoods.) The proposed landscape plan (pages 28 and 29) shows the developer planting 50 spruce trees, 20 maple trees and 16 honey locust trees (for a total of 86 trees). Specifically, these include a double row of Black Hills spruce along the south property line (between the proposed ponding area and Larpenteur Avenue) and 20 maple trees primarily along the driveway and near the building additions. The landscape plan (page 28) also shows new plantings near the building that would include lilac trees, spirea, junipers and dogwoods. The applicant should revise the landscape plan to add plantings in the front ponding area (consistent with the requirements of the city engineer) and to be consistent with Maplewood ordinance standards. The maple trees must be at least 2 % inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. In addition to the above, all yard areas should be sodded (except for mulched and edged planting beds). Lighting Plan The applicant submitted a proposed lighting plan for the new parking lots (page 30). This plan shows that the new lights will provide no more than .4 foot-candle of light at the school's property lines (the maximum allowed by the city code). In fact, the plan shows that the lighting at most of the property lines will be at. 1 or zero foot-candles. Other Comments Police Department Lieutenant David Kvam of the Maplewood Police Department noted that the proposed plans, with the additional entry/exit into the site, will benefit the school but may not alleviate the issues of the vehicles turning into the school. RECOMMENDATIONS ^. Adopt the resolution on page 40. This resolution changes the land use plan designation from R-1 (single dwellings) to S (school) for the properties at 2025 and 2027 Larpenteur Avenue. This change is for the expansion of Mounds Park Academy at 2051 Larpenteur Avenue. The city is making this change because: 1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan including: a. Provide for orderly development. b. Minimize conflicts between land uses. c. Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers. d. Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments. e. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. f. Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate buffering and separation. 2. This area would eliminate the planned residential area that was on a minor arterial street and was between a residential area and the existing school. 3. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for a school. This includes: a. It is on a minor artedal street and is near a collector street. b. Minimizing any adverse effects on surrounding properties because there would be no traffic from this development on existing residential streets. 4. It would be consistent with the proposed land use. B. Adopt the resolution on pages 41 - 43. This resolution approves a revision for the conditional use permit for Mounds Park Academy at 2051 Larpenteur Avenue. Maplewood bases this permit revision on the findings required by the code and it is subject to the following conditions (the additions are underlined and the deletions are crossed out): 1. All construction must comply with the site plan, date-stamped Apdl 8, 2004..":c'.'c..--.bc: ~. 7, 2000. The city council may approve major changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Such changes shall include: a. Revising the grading and site plans to show the contractor minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation and to meet all the conditions of the city engineer. The school may implement the changes and additions shown on the plans in phases. 10. 11. 12. 13. The city council shall review this permit revision one year from the date of approval, based on the procedure in the city code. The school shall turn the tennis court lights off by 9:00 p.m. Only the school shall use the tennis court lights. The school shall only use the area between the tennis courts and pond and the west lot line as a track or route for running dudng fall and spring cross-country meets. The school shall not allow garbage or trash pick up between the hours of 11:00 PM and 5:30 AM. The city council requires that the school remove ~c'c'_~ the westerly access at Pdce Avenue b=..~.cc-J_c~,--_.-:.cc~.~.' .%--.- c~c."--c.-.c-= · .... . _.k;~'^..__ c_':ccc" J The wooden screening fence shall be kept in good repair. The school, the fire marshal and the city building official shall agree on a plan for the school to make the required life safety and building improvements to the existing building. This plan shall include the installation of: a. The required fire protection (sprinkler) systems. b. An early wamin.q fire protection system (smoke detection and monitodn.(3). c. Additional emergency lights and exit signs (if necessary). d. The necessary changes to meet the handicapped accessibility code requirements. e. A proper address on the building. f. Any other changes the fire marshal or the building official deem necessary. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. Have the city engineer approve final construction and en.qineednR plans. These plans shall meet all the conditions and changes that the engineer noted in the memo dated Apdl 26, 2004. The school shall be responsible for the maintenance and clean up of the pondin,q areas on their property. The school shall post the driveways and drive aisles as no parking zones. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year. Approve the plans date-stamped Apdl 8, 2004 (site plan, landscape plan, grading and drainage plans and building elevations) for Mounds Park Academy. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the code. This approval is subject to the applicant or contractor doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the city issues a grading or building permit: Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, retaining wall, tree, sidewalk, driveway and parking lot plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code. (2) The (a) grading plan shall: Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. These shall include the normal water elevation and 100-year high water elevation for the ponds. (b) Include contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as may be required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. The ponds or basins shall meet the city's design standards and shall include best management practices and rainwater gardens wherever practical. (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" native vegetation rather than using sod or grass. (e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city. Show as little disturbance as possible on the west and east sides of the site to minimize the loss or removal of the trees. This is to keep and protect as many of the trees along the west and east property lines as possible. (3)* The tree plan shall: (a) Be approved by the city engineer before site grading or tree removal. (b) Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. (c) Show the size, species and location of the replacement trees. The deciduous trees shall be at least two and one half (2 1/2) inches in diameter and shall be a mix of coniferous trees and red and white oaks and sugar maples. (d) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (4) All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter except where the city engineer decides that it is not needed. (5) The project engineer shall submit to the city a storm water management plan, including drainage and ponding calculations, for the proposal. (6) Make all the changes and meet all the conditions as required by the city engineer and as noted by Chuck Vermeesch in the memo dated April 26, 2004. b. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction. c. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval that incorporates the following details: (1) Preserving as much of the existing vegetation (including large trees) along the western and eastern property lines as possible. (2) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. The native grasses and flowedng plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance. Specifically, the developer or contractor shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate. (3) That shows the location of all large trees on the site. (4) All trees would be consistent with city standards for size, location and species. (5) Planting (instead of sodding) the disturbed areas around the ponding areas with native grasses and native flowedng plants. The native grasses and flowedng plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance and shall extend at least four feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the pond. This is to reduce maintenance costs and to reduce the temptation of people mowing into the pond. (6) The maple trees must be at least 2 1/2 inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. (7) The plantings proposed around the building shown on the landscape plan date- stamped Apdl 8, 2004 shall remain on the plan. (8) In addition to the above, the contractor shall sod all front, side and rear yard areas (except for mulched and edged plantings or tree beds). (9) No landscaping shall take place in the Larpenteur Avenue boulevard. The contractor shall restore the boulevard with sod. (10) Adding more evergreen trees (Black Hills spruce or Austrian pines) along the west property line of the site. These trees are to be at least six feet tall and the contractor shall plant these trees in staggered rows. d. Submit matedal samples and color schemes for each building addition to staff for approval. e. Get a demolition permit from the city to remove the existing houses and garages from the properties at 2025 Larpenteur Avenue and 2027 Larpenteur Avenue. f. Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district. g. Get the necessary approvals and permits from Ramsey County. h. Provide design details (height, depth and materials) about the proposed retaining walls. i. After demolition, the school shall combine the properties at 2025 and 2027 Larpenteur Avenue with the school property for tax and identification purposes. j. Submit a letter of credit or cash escrow for all required extedor improvements. The amount of the escrow shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 3. Complete the following before using the new parking lots or before occupying the building additions: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Sod all landscaped areas, except for the ponding areas, which may be seeded. Install continuous concrete curb and gutter along all interior driveways and around all open parking stalls. Install a handicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space and an address on the building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs along all the driveways and drive aisles within the site and elsewhere, as may be required by staff. Paint any roof-top mechanical equipment to match the uppermost part of the building. (code requirement) Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. All light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties. g. Extend the privacy fence along the western property line from the opening at Price Avenue south to the right-of-way of Larpenteur Avenue. h. The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage and meet all city requirements. (2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. (3) Remove any debris or junk from the site. (4) Install the curb and gutter, parking lot and retaining walls as shown on the approved project plans. ]0 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June I if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spdng or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 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 before the installation or relocation of signs. CITIZENS' COMMENTS City staff surveyed the owners of the 180 properties within 500 feet of the site of the school property. Of the ten replies, one was for the project, one objected and eight had comments or concerns. For 1. Go for it! This school is an asset for the community. They are excellent neighbors. (Margaret & Bernard Tauer, Trustee, 1700 Stanich Place North.) Opposed I do not want to see this expansion! We were assured the last expansion would not affect the traffic flow and it certainly has. If you need a school that big, find another location. (Linda Goserud, 2021 Califomia Avenue East.) CommentslConcemslQuestions After reviewing all the information regarding the Mounds Park Academy remodel and expansion, we had a couple of questions, in looking at the property line map it shows the property of Mounds Park Academy going up to my back fence. That wouldn't be correct. Behind our homes is a 5-foot utility easement. That isn't their property. We already have a problem getting Xcel or the phone company behind there dudng the week due to students parking up on the grass during school. Another problem would be during the winter time. All the snow gets pushed up behind our homes on the easement blocking it short. If they expand the parking lot will that increase the amount of snow by the easement? The printing on the map is really small, so we were also wondering if they plan on opening the exit onto Price Avenue? If they do we will need more police patrols after school and weekends. The lower and upper parking lots are raceways on many weekends, and now they will be able to cut across on to Pdce Avenue. Looking at the landscape plan it looks like it will be opened up. The next thing we wondered about was the new pond up on the hill by the tennis courts. Will that pond drain into the old pond down below?. If that is the case they need to check into flooding of the easement area by the old pond. When they added the large drainage culvert on the east side of the pond, if there are some heavy downpours that last awhile there has been some flooding issues. Two years ago it went up into backyards reaching the back wall of a couple of homes. In general Mounds Park Academy has been a good neighbor. The biggest problem we always have is the easement issue. I do have documentation on the easement if needed. Also the four pine trees behind my home are mine and are planted behind my fence. Thank you. (Deborah Lewis-Majeski, 1732 Ruth Street North.) I live at 2117 Southwind Drive and one concern of mine is the added traffic on Beebe Road. As of now most of the traffic from and to the school is by students who seem to ignore the STOP sign on the school and pull out on Beebe Road and accelerate at a high rate of speed. I think there should be more traffic enforcement. Also concerning the existing pond, I would like to see it cleaned of debris, tires, logs, etc. This is a spring fed pond and houses a lot of ducks & geese habitat. Eliminate fertilizer runoff from the school property into the pond. The pond always has water even in long dry periods. Thanks for your consideration in these matters. (Gerald & Jolene Heller, 2117 Southwind Drive.) 12 o Make sure the traffic going into the school can turn dght and left off of Larpenteur Avenue into the school and not just off of Beebe Road on the north end of the school. Just exactly where will the new proposed field house be located and at what height will the building be? Will it be an eyesore for the homes on Beebe Road? Will the entrance off Beebe Road be changed or will it stay the same? Now about the trees and bushes around the school. After the last addition, the school was to plant trees and bushes next to the homes on Beebe Road. They planted the bushes and trees but never watered them and let the weeds grow up around them. They did weed whack the weeds once, but the weeds were still there to grow again. It's not exactly my opinion of proper landscaping or taking care of it. (Margaret Earley, 1783 Beebe Road North.) Traffic has to be changed. Exit of traffic from school should not be on Larpenteur Avenue but on adjacent streets. People on south side of property cannot get in and out because of congestive traffic of school. I think on Beebe Road would be best. (David & Audrey Anderson, 2060 Larpenteur Avenue East.) Being directly across from the school entrance my concem is the traffic congestion. The new plan should help alleviate the problem. Also, I would hope to see landscaping to shield the view of the parking lot. (Elizabeth Sailor, 1602 Wildwood Road, Clearwater Florida, owner of property across the street from Mounds Park Academy.) We have concerns about the traffic and parking on Beebe Road. When Phase II of the Mounds Park Academy is accomplished, it will mean even more traffic on Beebe Road, as this will be most easily accessible from Beebe Road. When cars are parked on both sides of Beebe Road it is unsafe now. It would be safer if the road was posted for parking on one side only. Thank you for sending all the information. (Delores & Art Kaese, 1771 Southwind Lane.) Also, see the letter on page 37 and the e-mail on pages 38 and 39. 13 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: Existing land use: 30 acres Existing school building, parking lots and athletic fields SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: West: East: Double dwellings near Holloway Avenue Single dwellings across Larpenteur Avenue Single dwellings on Ruth Street Single dwellings and four-plexes on Beebe Road PLANNING Zoning: R-1 (Single dwellings) Land Use Plan: R-1 and S (school) ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS Section 44-1092(3) requires a CUP for schools. Section 44-1097(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. See numbers I - 9 in the resolution beginning on page 41. Section 2-290(b) of the city code requires that the CDRB make the following findings to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments, and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. SITE HISTORY On Apdl 27, 1992, the city council approved a revision to the CUP for Mounds Park Academy to build two additions and expand their recreation areas. On November 14, 1994, the city council reviewed the CUP for Mounds Park Academy. The city council required a review in six months, after Independent School District 622 completed their proposed access road to Beebe Road, or in three years, whichever came first. On June 12, 1995, the city council approved a CUP and design review for Independent School Distdct 622. This was so the school district could expand their parking lot and reroute their ddveway to Beebe Road. APPLICATION DATE The city received all the materials for a complete application for this request on Apdl 8, 2004. State law requires that the city council act on requests within 60 days. The council must act on this request by June 6, 2004, unless the applicant agrees to a time extension. p:sec14/MPA - 2051 Larp. - 2004.cup Attachments: 1. Applicant's Statement of Intended Use 2. Location Map 3. Property Une Map 4. Land Use Plan Map 5. Site Suwey 6. Site Plan 7. Site Plan Detail 8. Site Plan 9. Site Plan Detail 10. Proposed Grading Plan 11. Grading Plan 12. Tree Removal Plan 13. Proposed Landscape Plan 14. Landscape Plan Detail 15. Lighting Plan 16. Proposed Building Addition Elevation 17. Engineering Department Comments dated April 26, 2004 18. Watershed District Comments dated April 23, 2004 19. Comments from Dan Soler of Ramsey County dated ^pdl 20, 2004 20. Letter dated April 15, 2004 from Schells 21. E-mail from Jeanne Ewald dated April 18, 2004 22. Land Use Plan Change Resolution (R-1 to S) 23. Conditional Use Permit Revision Resolution 24. Project Plans (separate attachments) Attachment 1 X./'_~'-Oz.7/ INTENDED USE OF PROPERTY ,&,P~ 0 8 200~1 Mounds Park Academy is currently a K-12 Independent School, and~,s~,~r~;)~rating at this location since 1982. This building has been operating as a scl~o~ll~ r~J~9. This application involves proposed work on our campus master plan which includes several major projects broken out into three phases: · Phase 1 involves extensive site work on the south half of the campus along Larpenteur Avenue with the work to be done from mid-June through the end of August. This involves adding a second entrance to the campus from Larpenteur Avenue as well as the addition of more parking and green space (please refer to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application which includes the modification of two residential properties which allows us to accomplish Phase 1). · Phase 2 is planned to commence spring 2005 and be completed in September 2006. This involves the construction of a field house (partially below grade), a two story classroom link connecting the new field house to existing locker rooms, new science labs, and the addition of a Pre-K classroom. · Phase 3 (the timing of which will depend largely on the success of our fundraising efforts) will include a new cafeteria and remodeled kitchen accommodating fifty additional students, a new relocated main entryway, a new expanded two story library and renovation of existing space within the school. This phase will most likely not start for at least two years after the completion of Phase 2 if our fundraising is successful. With these changes there will be improved traffic management, increase .available parking, and expanded green space for middle and lower school recess and physical education. The building additions and changes will provide significantly increased and improved facilities for all academic, arts and athletic program areas. Each of the three divisions (Upper, Middle and Lower Schools) will gain greater definition of space and identity, new and improved commons areas and a shared new cafeteria. The major part of the school building is 45 years old and in need of renovation. This expansion will allow our current population of 700 students and 125 employees (total of 825) to function more efficiently and also allow for future growth. Our student population .over the next five to ten years could grow to 790 which would include reaching our current maximum capacity in grades K - 12 and the addition of a Pre-K program. The total population in the school at that point would reach 925 (790 students plus 135 staff). Five years ago our total population was 785 (666 students plus 115 staff), and has grown steadily since then. Three years ago we increased the maximum size of grades 9 through 12 from 60 to 75 students per grade. That change has created the majority of the increase in students in the past five years and will be contributing to the projected increase. We currently have 260 students in grades 9 through 12 and are projected to grow to 300 which will bring us to full capacity. Our new proposed four court field house (included in Phase 2) will allow for a dedicated facility for our gym classes and after school athletic programs. Our current single gymnasium along with the shared use of our Nicholson Center (a dual purpose performing arts center and gym) is not sufficient for our athletic programs. In addition to using this field house for our own athletic programs, we will be looking to generate additional revenues from the occasional rental to outside parties fOr various activities, which we are presently doing from time to time with our current :facilities. The parking for this new field house will be located on the north side of the campus building across from the field house and will be most easily accessible from Beebe Avenue. _ 16 Attachment 2 · r o~ ~ X~ ~/ il ~ ~,o - ~/:~/ .... ~ ~~~ ~{ .._'( ~ ~- T_Z~ SAINT PAUL LOCATION MAP ~ ~ N RIPLEY AVE KINGSTON AVE E PRICE AVE E Z SITE LARPENTEUR AVE E SAINT PAUL PROPERTY LINE MAP 18 Attachment 3 1743 1737 1717 2135 Attachment 4 9 1997 KINGSTON AVE PRICE AVE POND 1769 1757 ', ...... ~k-~ . 1749 1743 SITE L'2095 LARPENTEUR AVE SAINT PAUL LAND USE PLAN MAP 19 POND 2027 Attachment 5 Sur~de Land ~ ~ II ~rve~ng, LLC. ~ ~.~u.u.u.u.u.u.u.u.u.~- I--,,,, J SITE SURVEY 2O Attachment 6 I ,I POND POND NEW PONDING AREA SAINT PAUL SITE II I' .... J I I r------j I I PLAN 21 ~1~!1 I~ifqu ,, II! II ~i ~,,, ," ';11 , t Attachment 7 SITE PLAN DETAIL 22 Attachment 8 II POND I "1i I.' I I. '1 rz-~J I II ! SAINT PAUL SITE PLAN Attachment 9 o L SITE PLAN DETAIL 24 ~c u) - og POND LARPENTEUR AVENUE L~ GRADING PLAN 25 Attachment 10 Attachment 11 NEW POND oo z~ GRADING PLAN 26 ii ['t [ I Attachment 12 TREE REMOVAL PLAN 27 000 ,j NEW POND Attachment 13 LANDSCAPE PLAN 28 Attachment 14 jl NEW PONDING ARI O © LARPENTEUR AVENUE · ......... / SAINT PAUL Attachment'S5 I. A R P E N T £ U R LIGHTING PLAN 3O Attachment 16 PROPOSED ADDITION (LOOKING SOUTHEAST) 31 APR O 8 200~ RECEIVED Attachment 17 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Mounds Park Academy Expansion PROJECT NO: REVIEWED BY: Chuck Vermeersch and Chris Cavett DATE: May 4, 2004 The applicant or their engineer shall address the following comments. Grading and Drainage Plan: Mounds Park Academy is an educational institution. Implementing some of the more innovative and environmentally fdendly best management practices (BMP's) as part of its planned expansion would provide a unique educational opportunity for its students and the public, as well as contributing to the overall appearance of the campus. The approach presented in the current submittal does not take advantage of this opportunity. The applicant should strongly consider implementing other BMP's for water quality treatment, such as rainwater gardens and infiltration practices. Information on other BMP applications can be found on the Metropolitan Council Website: http://www, metrocouncil.or,q/environment/Watershed/bmp/manual.htm Construction of the north pond will require the removal of two fire hydrants and some watermain. The applicant will submit plans to SPRWS for review and obtain all necessary approvals and permits. A wetland delineation report was included in the submittal. However, the project plans should show the wetland delineation, including the delineator and the date of delineation. 4. The hydraulic calculations should include reservoir routing for the wetland. Provide existing and proposed hydraulic calculations including the wetland. 5. Curve numbers for subcatchments 4, 21 and 22 appear to be too Iow (open water surface counts as impervious). 6. Label ponds and wetland with normal and high water levels (NWL, HWL), and indicate emergency overflow elevations and locations on drawing. 7. Provide a defined emergency overflow for the north pond lined with permanent soil stabilization blanket (Enkamat, NAG C350 or equal) The PondNET calculations for the north pond indicate a wet volume of 0.75 acre- feet, but the north pond design information summary lists the wet volume as 22,921 cubic feet (0.53 acre-feet). It appears that the smaller number is correct, and the north pond has insufficient wet volume to meet the water quality standard. 9. The north pond has an aquatic bench, but no maintenance bench. The pond is surrounded on three sides by retaining walls. The applicant should consider 32 17 Tha annli~-anf ehall aliminafa fha t-~ ~rh radii and anfran~-a al Dri~-z~ Awan~ ~a and ~vfend redesigning the pond to allow for future access and maintenance activities. With a depth of nine feet, the applicant also should consider fencing the pond for safety. 10. Both proposed ponds have a 3:1 slope from the top down to the water and are adjacent to parking areas. The school must provide a barrier or guardrail at both ponds. 11. The outlet structure for the north pond includes a five-inch orifice. Small odfices such as this are prone to plugging. The city does not recommend the use of orifices smaller than eight inches. 12. Generally, both ponds seem to be '~vedged in" to allow for parking, while the existing parking area at the southeast comer of the site has been eliminated. The applicant shall explore alternative configurations for ponds, parking areas and storm sewer, which would allow for better safety, aesthetics and water quality performance. If sufficient wet volume to meet the water quality standard cannot be obtained in the north pond, a portion of the tributary area could be piped to a revised south pond. 13. Complete and sign a maintenance agreement for cleaning and maintenance of the two new ponds and the existing ponding area. A draft of a maintenance agreement is attached. Miscellaneous: 14. Provide a six-foot-wide concrete sidewalk the length of the property along Larpenteur Avenue, located seven feet behind the curb. Provide the necessary easements if the sidewalk falls outside of the right-of-way. 15. The applicant shall submit plans to the RCMWD for review and approval, and obtain the necessary permits. 16. The applicant shall use an approved native seed mix for turf establishment in pond and wetland areas. Native seeding and vegetative restorations should include the areas around the pond, which might be considered as a buffer as described in the wetland report. Submit a landscape plan for the ponds that includes the use of some shrubs and trees in addition to the native seed mix. 17. The applicant shall eliminate the curb radii and entrance at Price Avenue, and extend the existing pdvacy fence, or provide screening in the form of landscaping along the west property line. 18. The relocation of the north entrance (on to Beebe Road) will require grading within an existing Great Lakes Pipeline easement. The applicant, or their engineer, must vedfy with the Great Lakes Pipeline that they will allow this grading, or the project engineer shall revise the plans such that the north entrance remains in the same location within the pipeline easement. 33 04/23/2004 13:46 6517042092 Rt4NWD PAGE 02 Attachment 18 Mounds Park Academy ~)4-18 1. Ali curb cuts shall be replaced with catch basins and pipe systems. The two catch basins that replaced the curb cuts near the wesmrn portion of the south pond shall be piped to thc northcast comcr of thc castem pond in order to increase water qualily treatment effectiveness. All pipes shall discharge at or below thc normal water elevation of thc pond. 2. An emergency overflow swale shall be installed at Catch Basin 3 on thc eastern pond at thc overflow point of each catch basin located at a low point. The swale shall extend to the normal water level of the downstream water body or at a point whcrc thc downstream ground slope is one percent or flatter. The swale shall bca minimum of ten fcct wide and one foot deep and bc lined completely with a permancm soil stabilization material. A detail of thc swale shall bc shown on a revised set ofplans. 3. A minimum of two feet of freeboard shall bc created between thc 100-ycar flood level of thc south pond and thc overflow point in thc pavement. APR 2 3 2006 I ECEIVED 34 Department of Public Works Kenneth G. Haider, P.E., Director and County Engineer ADMINISTRATION/hAND SURVEY 50 West Kellogg Blvd., Suite 910 St. Paul, MN 55102 * (651) 266-2600 * Fax 266-2615 E-mail: Public. Works@co.ramsey.nm.us Attachment 19 ENGINEERING/OPERATIONS 3377 N. Rice Street Shoreview, MN 55126 (651) 484-9104 · Fax 482-5232 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Ken Roberts City of Maplewood Dan Sol~ Ramsey C~inty Public Works Mounds Park Academy 2051 East Larpenteur Avenue April 20; 2004 APR 2 2 200 RECEIVED The Ramsey County Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed site plan revision for Mounds Park Academy at 2051 East Larpenteur Avenue. RamSey County has the following ~omments regarding this proposal. The use of the site will stay as a K-12 Independent School, Mounds Park Academy. The school is expected to experience a small amount of growth but not an amount significant enough to impact traffic operations along Larpenteur Avenue. The improvements to the site will likely improve on traffic operations in the area. The existing access configuration on Larpenteur Avenue is a single access point to Mounds Park Academy and two additional driveways to the homes at 2025 and 2027 Larpenteur Avenue. The two homes, along with their driveways, will be removed. A second access point to Mounds Park Academy will be constructed at the west edge of the school property. This additional access point, along with modifications to the parking areas, will improve traffic flow to and from the school property. The County recommends that the eastern access point provide the primary entrance to the school and the western access point provide the primary exit. Currently, left roms from Larpenteur Avenue into the school are prohibited between 2:30 and 4:00 pm. 'The County will consider eliminating this restriction because of the increased stacking space within the school property. If back-ups onto Larpenteur Avenue continue the turning prohibition will need to be re-installed. 35 ~in-ezota's First Home Rule County printed on ~c;~Aed paper with i minimum o~ lOX poat~c~mumer content 4. The property owner will be required to obtain a permit from Ramsey County Public Works for any work within the County right of way. Thanks for the opportunity to make comments regarding this issue. If you have any questions or need any additional information please give me a call. 36 APRIL 15'200 STEVE & SHEILA SCHELL 1694 RUTH ST. MAPLEWOOD MN. 651-777-6260 OAKDALEFLOWERS fo/MSN. COM Attachment 20 ' ECEIVED 1 9 2004 To: Kenneth Roberts, In respome to your neighlmrhood surv~ re.ruling Mounds Park Academy; we arc aware of their proposal and have met with them personally on a couple of occasions regarding their plans_ for ext~_n~ion which directly affects our ~. They hav~ be~*n very cooperative regarding the type of fencing they will be using to ensure our privacy. had to our satisfaction including not putting 8lass around the holding pond but using mulch to kecp the geese off the property. We are in agreemcnt with their pmposal for The lots behind our house and they even arc putting in non-invasive lighting. We have lived in our house for lSyearsand bave eqjoyed MPA as neighbors. Wefecltheywitl approach this project with the same integrity they use for their daily operations and Sincerely, ~_..___ .~, ,/'~ ~ ~ Steve & Sheila Schelt Cc: Dave Aune, MPA 37 Page 1 of 2 Attachment Ken Robe,s From: Ewald Jeanne liiewald~earthlink.net] Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 9:43 PM To: Ken Roberts Subject: Neighborhood Survey: Mounds Park Academy Hello Mr. Roberts, We write in response to the information mailed to us in regards to MPA's expansion and remodeling plans. We have lived at 1744 Ruth Street since 1984. MPA has been our neighbor for all of these years. After living through, and seeing the first and second expansions and remodeling, we have some insight into the process and appreciate a chance to give input to the the City of Maplewood. We were able to attend a meeting hosted by MPA on March 29, 2004 and already see some revisions from the first plans presented at that time. MPA has tried to communicate with the neighborhood in positive ways over the years and have sddom not addressed our concerns when things have caused neighborhood problems. However, our experience is that some of the original conditions of their conditional permit were not met, so we hope to be actively involved again with the new changes and agreements. After looking through the packet mailed to us we have some suggestions and concerns in the following 1) The moving of the front parking lot to the western edge of the property. The impact to the neighbors on Ruth St. and Larpenteur Ave. is extensive. The site plan currently lays out the road and parking lots with the main exit on to Larpenteur Ave. approximately 150 fl. from where Ruth St. (Maplewood side) enters the avenue. Ruth St. on the St. Paul side is staggered from Ruth St. in Maplewood and will be even closer to this exit, and therefore there will become in effect a" three corners." At the afternoon school release time we already have a considerable challenge to mm left from Larpenteur onto Ruth St. In addition, the proposed driveway in and out of the lot is a straight line directly behind the entire row of houses with backyards to the school, about 675 ft or 8-9 city lots in length. This length of drive, even with speed bumps, will create a new express route exiting the lot. As an informational point the houses on Ruth St. were built in typical rambler style with bedrooms on the back of their homes. I encourage city officials to consider these facts before approving the parking lot changes proposed. 2) The staged grading plan. As it is presented in the information mailed to us we will feel the impact of numerous summers involved with earth moving. We would like to recommend that all grading of parking lots from Larpenteur to the existing pond be completed in one summer. The houses closest to the project, including ours, will be dealing with dust and machines on our back lot lines for two years as it is currently proposed. Changing the plan will also improve the run offto the existing pond. The current parking lot next to the pond is eroded and collapsing. Staging the field house and upper area of development will not impact us quite as much as it is not immediately adjacent to the residential lot lines. 3) Tree removal and Landscaping Plan. This particular part of the plan should really come first in our opinion. When the additional parking and building addition occurred 12 years ago, trees where placed on the drawing but no 4/19/2004 38 Page 2 of 2 landscaping occurred beyond the front door of the school. In the building of the theater addition, several trees were removed and NOT ONE NEW TREE has been planted beyond the front entrance. The only screening or buffer from residences on Ruth St. was in the form of a wooden screening fence which we can look over from the elevation of our lot. This fence has been replaced several times in different sections following windstorms or general wear and tear, each new panel has a different look. Some buffer zone needs to be developed into this landscaping plan and we need to be assured by the City and MPA that it will be completed early in the plan and maintained into the future. As it is now, cars park up over the curb to within 3 fl. of the screening fence. Perhaps some posts along the curb edge and trees in the green space, trees in the parking lot islands... We need more green space and beauty in this plan, it did not happen last lime the conditional use permit was granted. As we have several questions regarding the grounds and ponds, we would like to request that the Landscape Archetetic for MPA be present to address questions when the public hearing is conducted. 4) Lighting The lighting of the current site has been an ongoing problem. The lighting was not designed to down-light but creates huge areas of light with just a few light fixtures. Current light poles place too much light in the wrong places. In addition the light poles are designed similar to Mall lighting and are very unattractive. The original agreement as to light timers and hours of lighting has not occurred or been enforced on a regular basis. Please involve the residents and consider looking at all the parking lots at one time in regards to lighting. 5) The new building addition. This new square foot area is extensive. The plan of the new field house building is well designed and will blended into the old structure. Our experience with the theater addition was a real adjustment for us. With virtually no screening, the massive wall has had a visual impact from our property. (We call it the outdoor movie screen.) This wall also created an ex:ho chamber. When the County Fair or baseball games are held at Goodrich we can decipher nearly every word of the armouncer, player or music. We would like to see a visual picture of what the full addition will look like and not see large blank wall expanses which could create a stereo echo system. Parking around the new addition does not seem sufficient for events. The new ponding area and run off into the existing pond raises questions of management of water run-off. Hopefully this input to you will continue a process of involvement with MPA as our neighbor. We do feel that MPA should not be denied land development or building expansion and appreciate the opportunity to be involved to improve our neighborhood together. Please feel free to call, e-mail or write us if we can be of additional help. Sincerely, Jeff and Jeanne Ewald 1744 Ruth St. Maplewood, MN 55109 (651)770-4088 jj ewald~earthlink.net 4/19/2004 39 Attachment 22 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, David Aune, representing Mounds Park Academy, proposed a change to the city's land use plan from R-1 (single dwellings) to $ (school). WHEREAS, this change applies to the properties at 2025 and 2027 Larpenteur Avenue (in Section 14, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota). WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On May 3, 2004, the planning commission held a public headng. The city staff published a headng notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the plan amendment. 2. On May 24, 2004, the city council discussed the proposed land use plan change. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described change for the following reasons: 1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan including: a. Provide for orderly development. b. Minimize conflicts between land uses. c. Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers. d. Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments. e. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. f. Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate buffering and separation. 2. This area would eliminate the planned residential area that was on a minor arterial street and was between a residential area and the existing school. 3. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for a school. This includes: a. It is on a minor arterial street and is near a collector street. b. Minimizing any adverse effects on surrounding properties because there would be no traffic from this development on existing residential streets. 4. It would be consistent with the proposed land use. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,2004. 40 Attachment 23 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mr. David Aune, representing Mounds Park Academy, has requested a revision to the conditional use permit for their school. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the existing school property at 2051 Larpenteur Avenue and the properties at 2025 and 2027 Larpenteur Avenue. The legal descriptions are: Tracts A, D, E, F, G, and H of Registered Land Survey No. 396, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Subject to County Road A (Larpenteur Avenue), the west 132 feet of the South 330 feet of the SE % of Section 14, Township 29, Range 22 (PIN 14-29-22-43-0009) SubJect to County Road A (Larpenteur Avenue), the east 132 feet of the West 264 feet of the South 330 feet of the SE % of Section 14, Township 2g, Range 22 (PIN 14-2g-22-43-0008) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit revision is as follows: 1. The planning commission discussed the conditional use permit revision on May 3, 2004. They recommended that the city council approve the revision. 2. The city council held a public hearing on May 24, 2004. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described conditional use permit revision for the following reasons: 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. 4. 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. 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. 41 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 must comply with the site plan, date-stamped April 8, 2004..".~c':cm~c; .. 2000. The city council may approve major changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Such changes shall include: a. Revising the grading and site plans to show the contractor minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation and to meet all the conditions of the city engineer. The school may implement the changes and additions shown on the plans in phases. 2. The city council shall review this permit revision one year from the date of approval, based on the procedure in the city code. 3. The school shall turn the tennis court lights off by 9:00 p.m. Only the school shall use the tennis court lights. 4. The school shall only use the area between the tennis courts and pond and the west lot line as a track or route for running dudr{g fall and spring cross-country meets. 5. The school shall not allow garbage or trash pick-up between the hours of 11:00 PM and 5:30 PM. L I~ The city council requires that the school remove ..cc- the westerly access at Price Avenue 7. The wooden screening fence shall be kept in good repair. The school, the fire marshal and the city building official shall agree on a plan for the school to make the required life safety and building improvements to the existing building. This plan shall include the installation of: a. The required fire protection (sprinkler) systems. b. An early warning fire protection system (smoke detection and monitoring). c. Additional emergency lights and exit signs (if necessary). d. The necessary changes to meet the handicapped accessibility code requirements. e. A proper address on the building. f. Any other changes the fire marshal or the building official deem necessary. 9. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 10. Have the city en.qineer approve final construction and en,qineedn,q plans. These plans shall meet all the conditions and changes that the engineers noted in the memo dated Apdl 26, 2004. 11. The school shall be responsible for the maintenance and clean up of the pondin.q areas on their property. 12. The school shall post the driveways and drive aisles as no parkinR zones. 13. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,2004. 43 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: DATE: MEMORANDUM Richard Fursman, City Manager Shann Finwall, Planner Maplewood Movie I ,Site - Chesapeake Retail Center 3091 White Bear Avenue Chesapeake Companies Development Group, LLC May 4, 2004 INTRODUCTION Project Description Chesapeake Companies has purchased the Maplewood Movie I Theater site located at 3091 White Bear Avenue. Chesapeake Companies proposes to demolish the theater and redevelop the 4.98-acre site with four new restaurant/retail buildings including TGI Fridays, Buffalo Wild Wings, Jared Jewelers, and a future multi-tenant retail center. The proposed name for the center is Chesapeake Retail Center. (Refer to the narrative on pages 18 through 21 and the maps and elevations on pages 22.) Requests Chesapeake Companies is requesting that the city approve the following requests to develop the Chesapeake Retail Center: 1. Preliminary Plat to divide the site into four lots. 2. Planned Unit Development. 3. Design Review. The planning commission reviewed and recommended approval of the preliminary plat and planned unit development (PUD) at the May 3, 2004, planning commission meeting. The community design review board (CDRB) should review and make a recommendation on all design review items including architecture, landscaping, lighting, and signs at the May 11, 2004, meeting. DISCUSSION Preliminary Plat Chesapeake Companies proposes to subdivide the 4.98-acre site into four separate lots to accommodate each new building. All four lots will be subject to cross easements for parking, access, and utilities. In addition, a sign easement will be created in the northeast corner of proposed Lot 1 along County Road D to accommodate a freestanding sign for Lot 2, which will not have public street frontage. The city engineer has identified future, expanded roadway right-of-way needs along both County Road D and White Bear Avenue. In order to accommodate the future expansion of these roads and rights-of-way, a condition of approval is the dedication of 10 feet of right-of-way along White Bear Avenue and 17 feet of right-of-way along County Road D. Chesapeake Companies has accommodated the additional rights-of-way in their site layout. Planned Unit Development The property is zoned business commercial (BC). Within this zoning district restaurants and retail stores are permitted uses. A PUD is requested to allow flexibility from the city's codes in order to produce a superior development. In addition, a PUD is required to assure cross easements and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities. Access to Site Access to the site will be achieved through two private driveways extending off of the mall road that is located west of the site. Preliminary plans for the expansion of County Road D reflect that access from County Road D onto the mall road will be a right-turn-in and right-turn-out only. Chesapeake Companies has requested that the city provide some assurance that access to the mall road will be maintained with the roadway expansion. In the engineering department's review on pages 45 through 47, the possibility of a % intersection (left and right-turn-in, but right-turn-out only) is discussed. In order to determine this feasibility, the engineering department is requiring that Chesapeake Companies conduct a traffic study which will identify what effects a left-turn-in will have on the overall flow of traffic in the area. As the roadway plans are preliminary at this point, approval of the preliminary plat and PUD are not dependent on this traffic study. Chesapeake Companies is currently attempting to negotiate with Arbys for a shared driveway access from White Bear Avenue. (Refer to preliminary White Bear Avenue driveway plans on pages 43 and 44.) Staff supports a shared driveway access as it would benefit Chesapeake Companies, Arbys, and the city as a whole. To accommodate a future driveway onto White Bear Avenue, staff has suggested that Chesapeake Companies shift both Building C (TGI Fridays) and Building D (Jared Jewelers) to the south. Chesapeake Companies is receptive to this recommendation and has indicated that the buildings would only need to be shifted to the south approximately five feet, or less, to accommodate a future driveway. The engineering department's review also states that an additional access would make sense; however, they point out that the 2002 Maplewood Mall Traffic Study did not account for such an access. If such a proposal were made, the engineering department states that Chesapeake Companies must conduct a traffic study update to compare the traffic generated by the proposed development and the impacts such an access onto White Bear Avenue might have to the area traffic. The Minnesota Department of Transportation's April 29, 2004, correspondence attached on page 49 states that it would also be beneficial for their agency to review any traffic studies conducted for this development. Chesapeake Retail Center 2 May 4, 2004 The existing conditions map located on page 26 shows two driveways on the south side of the property. These driveways access a small private drive owned by Mogren Development for the Wedding Day Jeweler building located to the south. The new site plan on page 25 reflects the removal of these driveways. Based on staff's suggestion, Chesapeake Companies and Mogren Development will accommodate for one vehicle and one pedestrian cross-access between the two properties. The site plan will be revised to reflect a cross-access driveway aligning with the continuous drive aisle in front of Building B (Buffalo Wild Wings) and a pedestrian cross-access extending from the sidewalk in front of Building D (Jared Jewelers). Setbacks Building Setback to Roads - City code requires all buildings within the BC zoning district to maintain a 30-foot setback from a right-of-way, with no required rear or side-yard setbacks. As proposed, the three buildings fronting White Bear Avenue and County Road D (Buildings A, C, and D) will maintain this setback. With the required dedication of 17 feet of right-of-way along County Road D, Building A will come within 13 feet of the new right-of-way. With the dedication of 10 feet of right-of-way along White Bear Avenue, Building C will come within 23.5 feet and Building D will come within 21.1 feet of the new right-of-way. Staff supports these setbacks, as they will be consistent with the neighboring buildings along County Road D (Circuit City) and White Bear Avenue (Arbys). City code does not specify a required setback to a private road. Both Building A (future retail center) and Building B (Buffalo Wild Wings) will be located approximately 15 feet from the mallroad. Staff supports these setbacks, as they will ensure adequate parking and vehicle movement within the site. Building Setback to Pipelines - There is an existing pipeline located on the south side of the property. This pipeline is owned and maintained by the BP Pipeline Company. City code requires all new buildings to be located at least 100 feet from a pipeline. BP's suggested distance for a building from their pipeline is anywhere outside of their easement. This pipeline's easement is approximately 40 feet wide. BP conducted a pipeline survey the week of April 19 and found th.at the pipeline is located 26 feet to the north of Chesapeake's south property line. This survey reflects that Building B (Buffalo Wild Wings) is 104 feet and Building D (Jared Jewelers) is 82 feet from the pipeline. However, shifting Building D five feet to the south will bring Building D within 77 feet of the pipeline. City code allows reduced setbacks to a pipeline with berming, an oil containment system, or similar requirements to mitigate the potential damage to a building by a pipeline leak or explosion. In addition, reduced setbacks are allowed where the building would not be any closer than the prevailing setback of neighboring buildings. The southeast corner of the lot is approximately ten feet higher than the remaining grade due to the location of a power pole. In addition to this grade difference, Chesapeake Companies proposes additional mitigation by a westward extension of the retaining wall south of Building D (Jared Jewelers). Chesapeake Companies states that the retaining wall height would be sufficient to create a prevailing ground slope away from Building D, thereby deflecting a potential flow from a pipeline leak. It should also be noted that two Chesapeake Retail Center 3 May 4, 2004 neighboring buildings are located closer than 100 feet to the pipeline, Baker's Square is located approximately 85 feet and North China Restaurant is located approximately 15 feet from the pipeline. For these reasons, staff supports a 77-foot setback to the pipeline for Building D. Parking Lot Setbacks to Right-of-Ways- City code requires parking lots to maintain a 15-foot setback from rights-of-ways. The proposed parking lot will come within 22.1 feet of the County Road D right-of-way. However, once the required 17 feet of right-of-way is dedicated, the parking lot will maintain a 5.1-foot setback. This setback should be adequate for a landscaping strip on the north side of the parking lot and will also be consistent with neighboring properties on County Road D (Circuit City and Arbys). Sidewalks Chesapeake Companies has agreed to install a sidewalk on the north side of their property, adjacent County Road D. The engineering department notes in their review that this sidewalk will represent an extension of a proposed trail identified in the Lake Links Trail Comprehensive Plan, and as such should be constructed with an 8-foot width of either concrete or bituminous material. -~ A sidewalk is also proposed along the mall road. Simon Companies, owner of the Maplewood Mall, has agreed to allow the construction of this sidewalk within their private drive aisle. To ensure further pedestrian access to and from the site, staff recommends the extension of the sidewalk in front of Building A (future retail/restaurant) onto the County Road D trail. Also, pedestrian access should be created from White Bear Avenue. Staff discussed this condition with Chesapeake Companies who state that the best location for pedestrian access onto White Bear Avenue would be stairwell south of Building D (Jared Jewelers). Grading/Drainage/Utilities The engineering department's review of the grading and drainage plan states that runoff from the site will be treated with two treatment structures to remove sediment from the site. A condition of approval is that the developers sign a maintenance agreement for the annual cleaning of the proposed treatment structures. The Maplewood Movie I Theater building was connected to sanitary sewer extending to the south, under the Wedding Day Jewelers and Jiffy Lube properties. Chesapeake Companies' utility plan shows the new connection under County Road D. The engineering department's review recommends that the developer maintain the direction of sanitary flow to the private line, and not redirect the flow to County Road D. Chesapeake Companies is willing to accommodate this request, if the existing sewer line can accommodate the future flows and if the legal issues regarding cross sewer easements can be resolved. Because of these issues, the engineering department's review specifies that the city may allow sanitary sewer connection under County Road D if Chesapeake Companies can provide supporting documentation as to why redirecting the sanitary flow to County Road D is warranted. Chesapeake Companies will be able to report further on this issue at the May 11, 2004, CDRB meeting. Chesapeake Retail Center 4 May 4, 2004 Chesapeake Companies is also proposing a water main service connection under County Road D. The engineering department's review specifies that there should be no water main service connection allowed under County Road D unless the sanitary service connection is approved by the city. However, Chesapeake Companies has been working with St. Paul Regional Water Services on the possibility of tying the water main into the existing fire hydrant connection alongside County Road D. The city engineering department and the St. Paul Regional Water Services must approve this connection. Parking Number of Parking Spaces - City code requires 315 parking spaces for the four proposed restaurant/retail buildings. Chesapeake Companies is proposing a total of 342 parking spaces. Chesapeake Companies has stressed the importance of the number of parking spaces needed to attract and retain desirable retail/restaurant tenants. In summary, they contend that all of the proposed parking is critical to their tenants. Size of Parking Spaces- City code requires parking spaces within the BC zoning district to maintain a 9.5-foot width x 18-foot length for the proposed uses. Parking spaces can be reduced in length by 2.5 feet when adjacent a curb, sidewalk, or landscaped area. Also, city code allows employee parking with reduced widths. Chesapeake Companies is proposing a majority of the parking spaces to be 9 feet wide x 18 feet long, with the allowable reduction in length when adjacent a curb, sidewalk, or landscaped area. Approximately 15 percent of the parking spaces will be 8 feet wide and will be signed as "compact" or "employee" parking. As the CDRB is aware, the City of Maplewood recently approved reduced parking widths within our new mixed-use zoning district. During research on parking spaces, staff found that the engineering field recommends parking spaces at 8.5 feet wide by 18 feet long, according to the 2000 Urban Land Institute's Dimensions of Parking. Because the city's adherence to the older standards can result in additional land unnecessarily being consumed by parking lots, the city council suppoded the reduction of parking space widths within the mixed-use zoning district from 9.5 feet to 9 feet wide. Therefore, staff also supports the reduction of parking space widths within the Chesapeake Retail Center, including the reduction of a majority of the parking spaces to 9 feet wide and approximately 15 percent of the parking spaces to 8 feet wide, as long as these spaces are signed for employee or compact cars only.. Maintenance City code requires all PUDs with common space to have an owners association responsible for insurance, taxes and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities. These documents should be submitted to city staff prior to final plat approval. Design Review Building Designs TGI Fridays - The TGI Fridays building will be 6,989 square feet in area and approximately 28 feet in height. The front of the building will be constructed of brick, Chesapeake Retail Center 5 May 4, 2004 granite, stone, and several glass windows. The rear of the building is proposed as EIFS and wood. Red and white canopies above the windows and an artistic front door give the building an art deco, or "Funky Fridays" appearance. The city should ensure consistent quality materials and detail on all sides of the building. The building elevations submitted show all of the detail on the front entrance, toward the parking lot. This design may be acceptable for a building with limited rear visibility, but not for this particular site. Staff recommends the removal of the EIFS building material and replacement of brick, granite, and stone building materials around the entire building. Consistent detail, including the parapet walls to ensure the screening of mechanical equipment, should be continued around the entire building. In addition, because the dumpster enclosure will be located along White Bear Avenue, the enclosure should be constructed of quality materials to match the building. Jared Jewelers - The Jared Jewelers building will be 6,000 square feet in area and 30 feet in height. All four elevations of the building will be constructed of brick, EIFS, and glass windows. The windows will be trimmed with brown and topped with a brown-color canopy. Because of the location of a large power pole and power easement on the southeast corner of the lot, a retaining wall will be constructed on the east and south side of the building. This retaining wall will begin at a height of approximately one foot on the north side of the wall to a maximum height of approximately five feet toward the southeast corner of the wall. The height of the wall may also increase with the shifting of the buildings to the south. The building will be approximately seven feet lower than the White Bear Avenue grade (refer to the south elevation on page 34). Staff finds all four elevations of the building attractive with consistent building materials. Because of the location of the dumpster enclosure along White Bear Avenue, the enclosure should be constructed of quality materials. Buffalo Wild Wings - The Buffalo Wild Wings building will be 5,430 square feet in area and approximately 23 feet in height. All four elevations of the building will be constructed of brickl stone, EIFS, and glass windows. A decorative black and yellow- checked canopy is proposed above the windows. There appears to be a yellow exposed neon stripe along the top of the building. Staff finds all four elevations of the building attractive with consistent building materials. However, staff recommends the removal of the exposed neon stripe and the construction of the trash enclosure with quality materials to match the building. Buffalo Wild Wings is also proposing a 1,000 square foot outdoor dining patio. Surrounding the patio is a 4-foot-high wrought iron fence with decorative lights. Staff finds the fencing and lighting an attractive addition to the building. However, Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett states that it.would be the preference of the police department to have an approximately 6-foot high, wrought iron fence similar to the one at the nearby Acapulco restaurant. Chesapeake Retail Center 6 May 4, 2004 Because of aesthetic concerns over a 6-foot-high fence and the fact that Buffalo Wild Wings is a family-style restaurant where the emphasis is on food and not alcohol, planning staff requested that Chief of Police David Thomalla review the city's policy, as well as other surrounding city policies, on fencing for outdoor patios where liquor is served. Chief Thomalla stated that the City of Maplewood has consistently required a 6-foot-high fence when them is a full liquor license, and has allowed a reduced height of fence when there is a wine and beer liquor license. Chief Thomalla also indicates that other Chief of Police stated that they apply the state statute, which requires that them is a "barrier" between the patio and the public area. Chief Thomalla supports the city's current policy of a 6-foot-high fence for a full liquor license. This is a decision for the city council during Buffalo Wild Wing's liquor license review, but is mentioned here for discussion. Multi-Tenant Building - The future multi-tenant building will be 9,620 square feet in area. There are no definite plans for the design of the building at this time. Therefore, this building must go through the CDRB approval process once final plans are submitted. Lightinq An existing, approximately 40-foot-tall light pole will be removed from the site and replaced with 15 box-style freestanding lights. These lights will be a maximum height of 25 feet from ground grade to the top of the fixture, which meets the city's maximum height requirement for freestanding lights. Chesapeake Companies proposes a minor change to the lighting plan submitted which would relocated most of the light poles into the landscape islands, rather than freestanding in the parking lot. The photometric plan submitted exceeds the maximum .4-foot-candle of illumination at all property lines, particularly along the south and east property lines. This plan should be revised to ensure a maximum of .4-foot-candles of illumination at all property lines, and should also take into account any proposed wall pack lights installed on the buildings. Signs City Code - Within the BC zoning district, the city's sign cOde allows each business with two street frontages, such as the Chesapeake Retail Center, to have five signs. Of these signs, one can be a freestanding sign up to 50 feet in height, depending on the setback, and 300 square feet in area. The remaining signs can be wall signs encompassing up to 20 percent of the gross wall area on which the sign is attached. Staff finds the city's existing sign code within the BC zoning district excessive. Because Chesapeake Retail Center is being processed as a PUD, the city may impose conditions on the number, size, location, or lighting of signage to ensure a quality development and to protect the public interest. Chesapeake's Sign Proposal- Chesapeake Companies has made sign recommendations in their narrative on page 20. In general, they recommend each building have one freestanding sign, 25 feet in height and 100 square feet in area, except for the multi-tenant building which would be allowed a freestanding sign up to 150 square feet in area. They recommend that each building be allowed three wall signs to be attached to separate elevations, except for the multi-tenant building which could have Chesapeake Retail Center 7 May 4, 2004 two wall signs for each tenant. Recommended wall sign size is limited to 20 percent of the gross wall area on which the sign is attached. City Staff's Sign Proposal - Adjacent businesses' freestanding signs include Arbys, Wedding Day Jewelers, and Circuit City. These signs range in size from 105 square feet in area and 20 feet in height (Wedding Day Jewelers) to approximately 200 square feet in area and 30 feet in height (Circuit City). Staff supports the proposed 100-square-foot freestanding sign for Buffalo Wild Wings, Jared Jewelers, and TGI Fridays, with a maximum height of 25 feet, as they are quite conservative comparatively. Because of the grade difference in front of Jared Jewelers, staff recommends that the height of the signs be measured from the grade of the building elevation, rather than the grade of the ground elevation, to ensure that the signs are not towering over the building heights. In addition, staff supports Chesapeake Companies proposal for three wall signs per building. Wall signs are limited in size to 20 percent of the gross wall area on which the sign is attached. Wall signs are allowed on the building, and not on a canopy. Staff recommends that both the freestanding sign and the wall signs for the multi-tenant building be reviewed at the time of CDRB application and that no specific conditions be made regarding signage for that building during this review. Freestanding Sign Setbacks - City code requires that freestanding signs maintain a ten- foot setback from all property lines. As proposed, all three freestanding signs are set back more than ten feet to the existing rights-of-way. With the city's required dedication of right-of-way Buffalo Wild Wing's freestanding sign will maintain a zero setback to the new County Road D right-of-way and a five-foot setback to the adjacent property; and TGI Friday's and Jared Jeweler's freestanding signs will maintain a five-foot setback to the new White Bear Avenue right-of-way. Since there is limited space in which to relocate the signs, and the fact that adjacent signs were constructed prior to the city's requirement for a ten-foot setback and therefore all maintain a zero setback from the right-of-way, staff supports a reduced setback of five feet. Staff recommends that the location of the freestanding signs along White Bear Avenue remain as proposed, and the freestanding sign along County Road D be shifted to the south by five feet, thereby creating a consistent five-foot setback for all freestanding signs on the site. To help mitigate this reduction in setback staff recommends that the base of all signs be constructed of quality building materials to match the buildings (similar to the Jared Jeweler's sign which has a brick base and decorative columns). Landscaping The city's tree preservation ordinance requires that all large trees be replaced one for one, but in no case must a developer replace more than ten trees per acre. A large tree is defined as any tree with a diameter of 8-inches at a four-foot-trunk height, excluding boxelders, cottonwoods, and poplars. Chesapeake Companies proposes to remove all 37 trees located on the site. Of these trees, 28 are considered large trees. The landscape plan shows the planting of 24 deciduous trees including linden, honey locust, and maple; and 17 ornamental trees including silk lilac and crab apple. This variation may change with the relocation of some light poles into the parking lot landscape islands. At which point there would be 19 deciduous and 24 ornamental trees. Chesapeake Retail Center 8 May 4, 2004 The tree replacement is well over that required by city code. However, city staff does not see the need for the removal of three maple and one honey locust tree underneath the power pole where there is no grading, and staff is also concerned about the removal of five maple and honey locust trees which border the Arbys/Chesapeake properties. These trees were a city requirement for the Arbys' development, but appear to be straddling the property line. Pending a shared driveway scenario with Arbys, staff recommends the landscape plan be revised to show the replacement of these five trees along the shared property line. In the event that a shared driveway scenario is proposed, a revised landscape plan should be submitted to city staff for approval showing the area of disturbance and landscaping proposed in that area. Chesapeake Companies proposes seven boulevard lindens to be planted between the sidewalk and the mall road located on the west side of the development. Boulevard lindens only grow to a width of 25 feet. To ensure an attractive row of boulevard trees along this side of the development, staff recommends an additional seven trees be planted, whether additional lindens or an alternative tree. The Jared Jeweler building is slated for development first. Because of this a final foundation landscape plan has been submitted for this building only. (Refer to plan on page 31.) These plantings include six ornamental trees and several shrubs and perennials. Staff finds this plan attractive, but would recommend that additional plantings be concentrated in front of the dumpster enclosure to help screen the enclosure from White Bear Avenue. A foundation landscape plan for each subsequent building must be submitted to staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. These plans should be consistent and complement the overall landscaping and Jared Jeweler's foundation plantings, and should ensure appropriate plantings in front of all dumpster enclosures to ensure screening from the roadways. In addition, a detailed landscape plan should be submitted for the base of each proposed freestanding sign. OTHER COMMENTS Police Department: Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett states that he has reviewed the plans for the Chesapeake Retail Center and states that he has no significant public safety concerns. However, the patio at BUffalo Wild Wings could be an issue. Assuming that the business will have a full liquor license, it would be the preference of the police department to have a more substantial enclosure than the proposed Iow wall. An approximately six-foot-high, wrought iron fence similar to the one at the nearby Acapulco restaurant would be preferred. Building Department: Dave Fisher, building official, states that all four proposed buildings must comply with the 2000 IBC and State Building Codes; must be sprinklered; and all handicap accessible parking stalls must be located at the closest location to the main entries. Fire Department: Butch Gervais, fire marshal, submitted the following comments regarding the Chesapeake Retail Center: Chesapeake Retail Center 9 May 4, 2004 Monitoring all parts of the fire protection system and fire alarm system will be required. Fire alarm systems will be required in TGI Fridays and Buffalo Wild Wings if the occupancy, including staff, will be 300 or more. Maintain a 20-foot emergency access clearance to the building for emergency vehicles. 4. Fire protection systems will be required in all four buildings. Watershed District: Clifton Aichinger of the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District submitted the following comments regarding the Chesapeake Retail Center: The project will require a watershed district permit. The stormwater system appears to include two underground stormwater treatment devices on which the watershed district will need hydrologic calculations. No additional stormwater treatment for this site will be required as a regional treatment system is in place downstream and the property is not discharging directly to a wetland. Construction site erosion control will be required throughout the development process with all sediment contained on-site and all storm sewer catch basins protected from sediment runoff after installation. Perimeter streets must be kept free of soil tracked off site during construction. RECOMMENDATIONS Approve Chesapeake Companies' preliminary plat for the Chesapeake Retail Center at 3091 White Bear Avenue date stamped March 30, 2004. Approval is subject to the following conditions: Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department's April 26, 2004, engineering plan review. b. Revise the plat to show: 1) The dedication of 10 feet of additional right-of-way along White Bear Avenue. 2) The dedication of 17 feet of additional right-of-way along County Road D. Prior to final plat approval, the following must be submitted for city staff approval: Chesapeake Retail Center 10 May 4, 2004 1) Easement agreement that governs and provides for legal cross easements for parking, access, and utilities, between all lots within the project. 2) Easement agreement for the installation and maintenance of a freestanding sign on Lot 1 to benefit Lot 2. 3) Owners association agreement specifying responsibilities for insurance, taxes and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities (including snow plowing). Record all easements and owners association agreements with the final plat. Approve the resolution on pages 50 and 51. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the development of four restaurant/retail buildings at 3091 White Bear Avenue (Chesapeake Retail Center). Approval is subject to the following conditions: Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department's April 26, 2004, engineering plan review as well as the following: 1) A westward extension of the retaining wall south of Building D (Jared Jewelers). The retaining wall height must be sufficient to create a prevailing ground slope away from Building D, thereby deflecting a potential flow from a pipeline leak. bo An easement agreement that governs and provides for legal cross easements for parking, access, and utilities between all lots within the project. An easement agreement for the installation and maintenance of a freestanding sign on Lot I to benefit Lot 2. An owners association agreement specifying responsibilities for insurance, taxes and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities (including snow plowing). All 8-foot-wide parking spaces must be signed as either "employee" or "compact" car parking only. Signage for Buildings B, C, and D are allowed as follows: 1) One freestanding sign, 25 feet in height and 100 square feet in area. Freestanding sign height must be measured from building grade to top of the sign, not ground grade to top of sign. All three freestanding signs must maintain a 5-foot setback from all property lines. All three freestanding signs must have a Chesapeake Retail Center 11 May 4, 2004 decorative base constructed of quality building materials to match the buildings. 2) Three wall signs per building, per elevation. Size of the wall sign is limited to 20 percent of the gross wall area on which the sign is attached. Wall signs are not permitted on a canopy. All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped March 30, 2004 and April 26, 2004, with revisions as noted in this approval. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes to the plans, including a change to the site plan for the proposed future driveway access onto White Bear Avenue, pending Ramsey County engineer and city engineer approval. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of city council approval or the permit shall end. The city council may extend this deadline for one year. i. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Approve the building and sign elevations, site plan, and landscape plan date- stamped March 30, 2004; the lighting plan date-stamped April 26, 2004; and the Jared Jewelers foundation landscape plan date-stamped April 26, 2004, for the development of the Chesapeake Retail Center 3091 White Bear Avenue. The developer shall do the following: ao Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for all three buildings for this project (Buildings B, C, and D). bo Submit the following to city staff prior to issuance of a grading or building permit: 1) Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department's April 26, 2004, engineering plan review as well as the following: a) A westward extension of the retaining wall south of Building D (Jared Jewelers). The retaining wall height must be sufficient to create a prevailing ground slope away from Building D, thereby deflecting a potential flow from a pipeline leak. 2) Obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the existing Maplewood Movie I Theater building. 3) Obtain the required RamseyNVashington Metro Watershed District permits. Chesapeake Retail Center 12 May 4, 2004 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) Submit payment for all required Park Access Charges (PAC fees) as specified in the Park Director's April 14, 2004, correspondence to Chesapeake Companies. Submit an easement agreement that governs and provides for legal cross easements for parking, access, and utilities between all lots within .the project. Submit an easement agreement for the installation and maintenance of a freestanding sign on Lot 1 to benefit Lot 2. Submit an owners association agreement specifying responsibilities for insurance, taxes and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities (including snow plowing). Submit a revised site plan showing the following: a) The dedication of 10 feet of additional right-of-way along White Bear Avenue. b) The dedication of 17 feet of additional right-of-way along County Road D. c) Building C (TGI Fridays) and Building D (Jared Jewelers) shifted approximately five feet to the south, or a lesser distance, to accommodate a future driveway located to the north of Building C that would extend onto White Bear Avenue. d) Pending continued cooperation with the adjacent property owner, show the location of a driveway and pedestrian cross-access on the south side of the property, to accommodate entrance and egress to and from the southerly property (3065 White Bear Avenue). e) The extension of the sidewalk in front of Building A (future retail/restaurant) onto the County Road D trail. f) A pedestrian access extending from the White Bear Avenue sidewalk. g) The relocation of Buffalo Wild Wing's freestanding sign to ensure a 5-foot setback from all property lines. A revised landscape plan that shows the following: a) The preservation of the three maples and one honey locust tree underneath the power pole on the southeast corner of the lot. Chesapeake Retail Center 13 May 4, 2004 b) c) d) e) f) 10) The addition of five maple trees on the north side of TGI Fridays, along the shared property line of the Arbys/Chesapeake property. - Pending a shared driveway scenario with Arbys, a revised landscape plan showing the area of disturbance and landscaping proposed. Seven additional trees on the west side of the property, between the sidewalk and the Maplewood Mall road. Additional plantings in front of Jared Jeweler's dumpster enclosure to help screen the enclosure from White Bear Avenue. A foundation landscape plan for TGI Fridays and Buffalo Wild Wings. These plans should be consistent and complement the overall landscaping and jared Jeweler's foundation plantings, and should ensure appropriate plantings in front of all dumpster enclosures to ensure screening from the roadways. g) An underground irrigation plan to ensure all landscaping is irrigated per city code. Revised building and dumpster enclosure elevations showing the following: TGI Fridays: a) Removal of the EIFS building material and replacement of brick, granite, and/or stone building materials and consistent building detail, including parapet walls, on all elevations of the building. b) Dumpster and recycling enclosure constructed of quality building materials to match the building. The enclosure must be at least 6 feet high and have a 100-percent opaque gate. Jared Jewelers: a) Dumpster and recycling enclosure constructed of quality building materials to match the building. The enclosure must be at least 6 feet high and have a 100-percent opaque gate. Buffalo Wild Wings: a) Removal of the exposed neon stripe. Chesapeake Retail Center 14 May 4, 2004 do b) Dumpster and recycling enclosure constructed of quality building materials to match the building. The enclosure must be at least 6 feet high and have a 100-percent opaque gate. 11) A revised outdoor lighting and photometric plan. The revised plan shall show the exact location, height, and style of all outdoor lights. The light illumination from all outdoor lights may not exceed .4-foot-candles at all property lines. 12) A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. Prior to issuance of sign permits, the following must be submitted: 1) Sign elevations for Buildings B, C, and D as follows: a) One freestanding sign, 25 feet in height and 100 square feet in area. Freestanding sign height must be measured from building grade to top of the sign, not ground grade to top of sign. All three freestanding signs must maintain a 5- foot setback from all property lines. All three freestanding signs must have a decorative base constructed of quality building materials to match the buildings. b) Three wall signs per building, per elevation. Size of the wall sign is limited to 20 percent of the gross wall area on which the sign is attached. Wall signs are not permitted on a canopy. 2) A detailed landscape plan for the base of all three proposed freestanding signs. Complete the following before occupYing the buildings: 1 ) Install all required exterior improvements. 2) Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets. 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. Chesapeake Retail Center 15 May 4, 2004 go 2) The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June I if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer. All work shall follow the approved plans. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes to the plans, including a change to the site plan for the proposed future driveway access onto White Bear Avenue, pending Ramsey County engineer and city engineer approval. Building A and signs associated with Building A are not included in this community design review approval. CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the 25 surrounding property owners within 500 feet of this site for their comments. Two property owners replied as follows: Thomas Schuette on behalf of Azure Properties and Woodring Company - 3069 White Bear Avenue (Acapulco Restaurant and Jiffy Lube Oil Change): Mr. Schuette submitted correspondence dated April 23, 2004, attached on page 48. In summary, Mr. Schuette expressed concern regarding adequate parking on the site and possible overflow parking to their site. Bruce Mogren on behalf of Mogren Development Company - 3065 White Bear Avenue (Wedding Day Jewelers): During a telephone conversation with staff, Mr. Mogr.en stated that he would be supportive of a shared driveway from the Chesapeake Retail Center onto his property. Chesapeake Retail Center 16 May 4, 2004 REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 4.98 Acres Existing Use: Vacant Movie Theater SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: East: West: Arbys Restaurant and County Road D Retail/Restaurants including Wedding Day Jewelers, Acapulco Restaurant, and future Jiffy Lube White Bear Avenue and Fazolies, Mama Mias, Baker's Square, and North China Restaurant Maplewood Mall Ring Road and Circuit City PLANNING Land Use Plan Designation: Business Commercial (BC) Zoning: Business Commercial (BC) Criteria for CUP Approval Article V, Sections 44-1091 through 44-1105 states that the city council may grant a CUP subject to the nine standards for approval noted in the resolution on pages 50 and 51. Application Date We received the complete application and plans for this proposal on April 14, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal. City council action is required on this proposal by June 13, 2004, unless the applicant agrees to a time extension. Com-Dev\Chesapeake Retail Center 5-3-04 PC Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Chesapeake Companies' Narrative 19. Location Map 20. Zoning Map 21. Land Use Map Site Plan 22. Existing Conditions 23. Preliminary Plat 24. Grading Plan Utility Plan 25. Overall Landscape Plan 26. Jared Jeweler's Foundation Landscape Plan Jared Jeweler's Elevations Jared Jeweler's Floor Plan Jared Jeweler's Freestanding Sign Elevation TGI Fridays Elevations TGI Fddays Floor Plan TGI Fridays Freestanding Sign Buffalo Wild Wings Elevations Buffalo Wild Wings Floor Plan Buffalo Wild Wings Freestanding Sign Proposed White Bear Avenue Driveway (Two Options) City Engineer Review Azure Properties 4/23/04 Correspondence Minnesota Department of Transportation's Apdl 29, 2004, Correspondence Conditional Use Permit Resolution Large Plans (Separate Handout) Chesapeake Retail Center 17 May 4, 2004 Attachment 1 APPLICATION NARRATIVE PUD Development Plans for Chesapeake Retail Center at Maplewood Mall Project Narrative March 30, 2004 Introduction Chesapeake Companies Development Group, LLC is submitting the attached applications for redevelopment of an existing retail site into a multi-site retail development in Maplewood, Minnesota. This narrative describes the site development and aspects of the application request. Development Description The 4.98 acre site is a peripheral property to the Maplewood Mall located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of White Bear Avenue and County Road D. The Maplewood mall private road runs along the west edge of the property. As detailed on the Site Plan, the existing movie theatre building will be demolished to allow for the proposed commercial site that will consist of approximately 29,000 square feet of new retail space. The new retail space will include two free-standing restaurant buildings, one free standing retail building, and one inline multi-tenant retail/restaurant building. Since the proposed development is being designed and implemented into one master-planned retail project with common access and parking areas, a Planned Unit Development approval is being requested. Due to the property configuration, available access, and adjacent roadways each of the buildings will face more than one street or common area. Access to the site will be from the Maplewood mall private road that is accessed from County Road D or the mall ring road. The property has frontage on both White Bear Avenue and County Road D. Site Zoning and Right-of-Way According to the City's Zoning Map, the site is currently in the BC business commercial district. The proposed uses are permitted uses within this zoning district. The site meets or exceeds the City's zoning requirements for building and parking lot setbacks City Staffhas identified (on a preliminary basis) future, expanded roadway right-of-way areas along both County Road D and White Bear Avenue. The areas specifically identified by City Staff within the development property include 17 feet of right-of-way along the northern edge of the property paralleling County Road D, and 10 feet of right- of-way along the eastern edge of the property paralleling White Bear Avenue. These identified, preliminary areas have been considered in the site design and are reflected in the general site layout. Page 1 of 4 18 Site Layout and Parking The proposed site layout consists of four buildings for retail and restaurant uses. The buildings are located on the site to maximize parking area and visibility from White Bear Avenue and County Road D. The proposed buildings are located a minimum distance of 30-feet from public right-of-way along County Road D and White Bear Avenue and are constrained by a power line easement and power pole located within the south portion of the site. The proposed parking lot adjacent to County Road D is a minimum of 22 feet from the existing right-of-way in recognition of future roadway and trail right-of-way areas identified by City Staff. Public sidewalks have been included along County Road D and the mall private road to provide efficient pedestrian access to the development. The general site layout provides for an increase in green-space area from approximately 10 to 20 percent of the total lot area relative to existing conditions. Additionally, impervious surface area has been reduced from approximately 90 percent to 80 percent of the lot area. Access to the site is via to two entrance drives from the mall private road. The entrance drives are 30-feet wide and drive-lanes are 24-feet wide. Parking has been provided to exceed the following standards: Retail/Office, 5 stalls per 1,000 SF of space; and Restaurants, 5 stalls per 200 SF of patron usage area. For the purpose of computing required stalls for the northwest retail/restaurant building, the assumed usage is 2/3- restaurant space and 1/3-retail space. Typical parking stall dimensions are 9-feet wide by 18-feet long. Approximately 17 percent of the parking stalls will be 8-foot width compact stalls. Platting The property is currently platted as a single lot. As detailed on the Preliminary Plat drawing, the development proposal includes the replatting of the property for the creation of four individual lots. The site meets the City's zoning requirements forbuilding and parking lot setbacks. All properties will be subject to a Declaration of Easements Agreement which will govern and provide for legal cross easements for parking, access, and utilities between all lots within the project. A sign easement area will be created in the northeast comer of proposed Lot 1 along County Road D in favor of proposed Lot 2 thereby allowing for the installation of a free-standing sign. Building Architecture The buildings of Chesapeake Retail Center at Maplewood Mall are located on the site to face a common internal parking area. The architecture of the freestanding buildings will reflect the individual tenant retail identities through the incorporation of their proprietary retail image and signs. Page 2 of 4 19 Mechanical equipment is located on the roofs of the buildings. Parapet heights of the buildings provide site line screening. Service area screening is provided by a combination of structural walls with wood gates and landscape plantings. Jared, The Galleria of Jewelry (Building C) architectural materials will consist primarily of two colors of brick with two complementary colors of EFIS. All of the building elevations utilize the same materials and similar details. T.G.I. Friday's (Building D) architectural materials will consist primarily of complimentary colors of brick, granite, stone, and EFIS. All of the building elevations utilize the same materials and similar details. Buffalo Wild Wings (Building B) architectural materials will consist primarily of complimentary colors of brick, split-face concrete block, and EFIS. All of the building elevations utilize the same materials and similar details. A description of Buildings A is not included with this submittal. Comprehensive Sign Plan Due to the property configuration, available access, and adjacent roadways each of the buildings will face more than one street or common area. The overall development functions much like a comer lot. Adequate identification signage for each of the four platted lots will be critical to ensure efficient traffic flows to the site. Freestanding signs and building signage will reflect the individual tenant retail identities through the incorporation of their proprietary retail image and typical trademark signage. Identification signs for Buildings B, C, and D will include one illuminated freestanding pylon sign, and a total of three illuminated building fascia signs. Pylon signs will be a maximum height of 25 feet and will include a maximum total sign copy .area of 100 sfper side. The freestanding sign for Building B (proposed Lot 2) will be located on proposed Lot 1 along County Road C. Building fascia signs will be limited to one sign per building elevation and will not exceed twenty percent of the wall surface to which the signs are attached. Identification signs for multi-tenant Building A will include one illuminated freestanding pylon sign, and a total of two or three illuminated building fascia signs per building tenant. The pylon sign will be a maximum height of 25 feet and will include a maximum total sign copy area of 150 sfper side to be shared by all building tenants. Building fascia signs will limited to one sign per tenant exterior fagade and will not exceed twenty percent of a tenant's wall surface area to which the signs are attached. Page 3 of 4 20 Utilities and Stormwater Treatment Public utilities for sanitary sewer and water main are presently available to serve the site within the adjacent roadway right-of-ways. Natural gas, electricity, and telephone are also available to serve the site. Storm sewer is presently in place within the mall private road to serve the surface drainage needs of the site. The storm sewer system within the existing site will be re- constructed to accommodate the site changes. Stormwater runoff will continue to discharge into the existing storm sewer system; however the runoff quality will be improved by routing the stormwater runoff through treatment structures to remove sediment and floatables prior to discharge into the existing storm sewer system. As shown on the Utility Plan, the sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer utilities will be extended into the site to serve the proposed project. Landscaping and Lighting The overall landscape area within the site will increase from approximately 10 to 20 percent of the total lot area. The typical landscape island areas are larger than the present islands to better accommodate plantings. The overall number of trees and plantings throughout the site will be increased and additional foundation plantings will be provided. The mall private road boulevard trees will be removed to accommodate construction of the new public sidewalk; however the removed trees will be offset in number by new trees to be planted along this new sidewalk as well as the new public sidewalk/trail along County Road D. The Site Lighting Plan details the locations of proposed light poles and the photometric details. The plan also shows the type of proposed fixtures and pole heights. All site lighting will comply with the city standard lighting requirements and restrictions. Schedule The proposed development schedule would include a construction start date in late spring of 2004 (approximately May lSt). Initial construction site work will include demolition, grading, utilities, curbing and paving followed by building construction of the Jared building, Buffalo Wild Wings building and Building A. The Jared and Buffalo Wild Wings buildings are targeted for completion and site opening in fall 2004. Construction of the TGI Friday's building will likely be finished between late fall 2004 and early summer 2005. Page 4 of 4 Attachment 2 Mall Maplewood Movie I Site 3091 White Bear Avenue '11 N Location Map S 22 Attachment 3 Farn F Ri Ri F :l~Zelwood Park R1 F R1 R1 R1 LBc R3R1 R2 R1 R1 R2 R1 N Zoning Map 23 Attachment 4 R2 Bruentrup [ II Park lwood~ark N Land Use Map 24, Attachment 5 ROAD D C D / / £ N 25 Site Plan COUNTY Attachment 6 il N Existing Conditions S 26 COUNTY '/ / OWNER/APPLICANT Chesapeake Companies Deve~oprnent Gro~0, LLC II100 WayzotQ Bird, Suite ?66 M~nnetonk~3. MN 55,~05 Attachment 7 N Preliminary Plat S 27 Attachment 8 Grading Plan S 28 Attachment 9 ROAD / N S Utility Plan 29 Attachment 10 5-RSM Shrub Detail 3-PFC Tree Det~il Evergreen Detail 4-1SL 2-SKH lO-ACS 2-1SL N S Landscape Plan 30 Attachment ll Planti~ ~e~ule NOTE: ONLY LABELED PLANT MATERIALS ARE INCLUDED IN THE JARED JEWELER LANDSCAPING 11-PWJ 1 -PS 1 -PSC 8-SBH ,t-GFP 16-SDD 27-SCJ N 33-SCJ -- 16-SDD 24-HR 4-GFD FFE=947.00 3-GFD -PSC 5-PW iii I / / /./ 1-PSC ,~-PW \ CONCRETE--''~ Jared Jeweler's Foundation Landscaping Plan 31 Attachment 12 ~.~) Elevations (Jared Jewelers) 32 (~AI~ ELEVATION ELEVATION Elevations (Jared Jewelers) 33 Jared Jeweler's South Elevation - Grade Difference from White Bear Avenue 34 Attachment 13 !t!tltli! Floor Plan (Jared Jewelers) 35 Attachment 14 SECTION 1/2'-1'-0' PLAN 1/2'"1'-0° I r_l Lm .... rJ Lm k _1 I I (~ FRONT ELEVATION (~ SIDE ELEVATION PYLON SIGN Freestanding Sign Elevation (Jared Jewelers) 36 Attachment 15 Ft~ONT ELtEVATtlDN i I : . · . : ." ' ,:~ ..t, :~ -1 I.!':,L,. ,~':' .:;~11 I I Elevations (TGI Fridays) 37 Attachment 16 N S Floor Plan (TGI Friday's) 38 Attachment 17 10'-6" W-75 75.0 Squm'. Feet Freestanding Sign Elevation (TGI Friday's) 39 Attachment 18 Elevations (Buffalo Wild Wings) 4O Attachment 19 Floor Plan (Buffalo Wild Wings) 41 VARIES B ~ DOUBLE FACE ILLUMINATED PYLON SIGN SIGN CABINET WITH FLEX FACES ILLUMINATED W/HO FLUORESCENT LAMPS WHITE FLEX FACES ARE OVERLAID ON THE FIRST SURFACE WITH #525 BRIGHT YELLOW AND #22 BLACK ARLON TRANSLUCENT FILM WITH THE EYE, HORN AND WING WEEDED OUT WHITE. SQUARES ARE #525 BRIGHT YELLOW ARLON TRANSLUCENT FILM BACKGROUND IS FIRST SURFACE ARLON #03 BLACK OPAQUE FILM SUPPORT PIPE PAINTED SEMi-GLOSS BLACK SiGN AREA A B C D E I _F ( SQ F'D PS-110 9'-2" 15'-7" 8'-0" 10" 7" 10" 143 PS-98 8'-2" 13'-10" 7'-1" 9" 6.5" 9" __113 PS-86 7'-2" 12'-2" 6'-3" 8" 6" I 8" ~ 87 Attach~.~ent 20 Freestanding Sign Elevation (Buffalo Wild Wings) 42 Attachment 21 Possible Future Shared Driveway (Option One) 43 COUN'I~ lOAD D C / O~ 0 Ol 0 0 0 ~ Possible Future Shared Driveway s (Option Two) 44 Attachment 22 Enl~ineering Plan Review PROJECT: Chesapeake Retail Center PROJECT NO: 04-09 REVIEWED BY: Erin Laberee and Chris Cavett Maplewood Engineering Dept. DATE: April 26th, 2004 Chesapeake Companies has purchased the Maplewood Movie Theater 1 site at the southwest comer of County Road D and White Bear Ave. They are proposing to redevelop the site to include two restaurants (TGI Fridays and Buffalo Wild Wings), a jewelry store, (Jared Jewelers) and a strip mall with various tenants. Currently the developer is proposing access to the site from Maplewood Mall Road. The developer is requesting that the city consider maintaining access to the site from County Road D and White Bear Ave. when improvements are made to White Bear Avenue. Runoff from the site will be treated with two treatment structures to remove sediment from the site. Drainage from the site is eventually treated downstream in Markham pond, a regional treatment pond. The developer shall address the following issues. Grading & Erosion Control A building permit will be required for the proposed retaining wall located east of Jared Jewelers since a portion of the wall height is greater than four feet. A plan and a specific soil stabilization detail for the wall design will be required as part of the building permit. 2. The developer must sign a maintenance agreement for the annual cleaning of the proposed treatment structures. Utilities The applicant has proposed a sanitary sewer service connection for the site under County Road D. The existing sewer service to the movie theater is connected to a private sanitary sewer line under Maplewood Mall Road. It is recommended that the developer maintain the direction of sanitary flow to the private line and not redirect it to County Road D. If the developer is able to provide supporting documentation as to why redirecting the sanitary flow to County Road D is warranted, the city will consider approving the connection. No water main service connection will be allowed under County Road D unless the sanitary service connection is approved by the city. The applicant shall have the location of the BP pipeline surveyed and shown on the plans. City code requires a 100-foot offset from the pipeline to any buildings. The city must approve the building locations if they do meet the 100 foot offset requirement. The applicant shall provide the city any conditions of review from the BP pipeline prior to the city approving grading and utility permits for the site. 45 Misc. The developer shall dedicate 10 feet of right of way along White Bear Ave. and 17 feet of right of way along County Road D. The additional right of way is for future improvements to the respective streets. The proposed sidewalk along County Road D is shown at 5 feet wide. As this is the location of a proposed trail identified in the Lake Links Trail Comprehensive Plan, the trail/walk shall be constructed 8 feet wide. The trail may be constructed with bituminous or concrete and shall conform to the city's standard plate for sidewalks and trails, (plate no. 230) NOTE: The developer is requesting that the city provide some assurance that access to the mall road, located on the west end of their site, be maintained when County Road D is upgraded in the furore. At this time an expansion of County Road D is anticipated for 2007 or 2008. The engineering department has informed the developer that no guarantees can be made at this time. Based on preliminary layouts of a future County Road D, the intersection would be reduced to a right- in-right-out. Staff also discussed with the applicant the possibility of a 3A intersection, (left and right-in, but right-out only). There is some possibility that this option might be feasible in the future, but it is still rather early yet to determine. Staff discussed with the applicant that if they wanted some assurance that a ~ intersection might be feasible, then they would need to conduct a traffic study. A traffic study update will identify what effects a left mm in will have on the overall flow of traffic in the area. The developer may conduct their own traffic study, to be reviewed by the city's traffic engineer, or may contribute $5,000 for a traffic study to be prepared by the city. The study would review what impact a left mm in to Maplewood Mall Road might have to County Road D and White Bear Avenue. Currently, the developer is only proposing access to the site from Maplewood Mall Road. The applicant is considering a possible furore proposal to provide access to the site via a shared drive with Arbys. The following comments are for future access improvements to the development and should not have a bearing on the current proposal as laid out in the plans dated March 22na, 2004. Any future access to White Bear Avenue would require approval and review by the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer. The proposed development and a possible future right-in, right-out access to White Bear Avenue would have impacts to the flow of traffic on White Bear Avenue and County Road D. Though such an access and a subsequent elimination of another access may make sense, however traffic flow in this area has been of concern to the City and County for quite some time. A detailed traffic model was done in 2001 & 2002 to analyze traffic movement at the intersection of County Road D and White Bear Ave. The past traffic study did not account for the type of access possibly being considered by the developer in the future. If such a proposal were made, a detailed traffic study update would need to done to compare the traffic generated by the proposed development and the impacts such an access onto white Bear Avenue might have to the area traffic. 46 If access to white Bear Avenue is proposed, the city will require a separate traffic study be completed to determine what effect this will have on traffic flow. In this case the study will be more detailed and must be done by the city's traffic engineer. The developer would be required contribute $15,000 to the city to conduct a traffic study for any proposal to access White Bear Ave. Approval of this development is not dependent on this study. Access approval is dependent on the outcome of the traffic study and approval of the city engineer and the Ramsey County traffic engineer. Currently the improvements to White Bear Avenue and County Road D are scheduled to begin in 2007. However, the plans must be coordinated with the Federal Highway Department and could take 12 to 18 months to complete. Also, the environmental and design phase of the project will take another 12 to 18 months to finish. Many of the decisions regarding geometry and access to County Road D or White Bear Ave may take as long to determine. There is a likelihood that County Road D w~ll be turned over to Ramsey County after improvements are made. Any improvements to County Road D will require acceptance from the County including access to the development. Any decisions made regarding future site access may take as long as 30 months. 47 AZURE PR OPER TIES P.O. BOX 17830 ST. PA UL, MN 55117-7830 (651) 484-0070 (FAX) 486-3444 Attachment 23 April 23, 2004 Facsimile 651-249-2319 Shann Finwall Planner Office of Community Development City of Maplewood 1830 East Cry Rd. B Maplewood, MN 55109 RE: Proposed Redevelopment of the Maplewood One Theater Site 3091 White Bear Ave. Maplewood, MN Dear Shann, This letter is written on behalf of Woodring Company regarding the proposed Maplewood Movie One Theatre site redevelopment. Woodring Company owns the site which is the location of the Acapulco Restaurant and the soon to be built Jiffy Lube Oil Change facility. Woodring Company is concerned that the new development must have adequate parking to properly serve its customers without overflow to adjoining properties. Adequate available parking is a critical element of commercial real estate. Woodring Companies has elected to replace the former "Pizza hut" restaurant on the Acapulco site with a new Jiffy Lube facility because the Jiffy Lube will cause little parking impact. The Acapulco restaurant customers will have adequate parking due to this change of use of the second building. As the southern neighbor of the proposed movie theater redevelopment, Woodring cannot accommodate any overflow parking. We ask that the Office of Community Development carefully consider that the amount of parking being provided is adequate for the needs of the new restaurants and other commercial tenants to be located on the former theater site. Thank you for your consideration. Please call if I can answer any additional questions regarding this matter. Thomas M. Schuette , On behalf of Azure Properties TMS/kl 48 Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Attachment 24 Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 April29,2004 Shann Finwall Associate Planner - City of Maplewood Maplewood Community Development 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 SUBJECT: Chesapeake Retail Center NW Quad of County Road D and White Bear Ave Dear Mr. Finwall: Thank you for the opportunity to review the above referenced development proposal. This site is not directly adjacent to Mn/DOT's right of way, however the intensity of this development will likely have an impact on the traffic operations at White Bear Avenue and 1-694 Interchange. Due to the high traffic volumes there are currently operational problems at this interchange. We are concerned that the additional traffic from this development will exacerbate the problem. It would be beneficial for our agency to review any traffic studies conducted for this development. Thank you again for keeping our agency informed of this development. We would appreciate maintaining our early involvement and reviewing any studies or changes for the development. If you have any questions concerning our review please feel free to contact me at (651) 582-1378. Senior Planner Copy: Dan Soler / Ramsey County Traffic Engineer Jeff Wurst / Chesapeake Companies Development Group, LLC Shari Ahrens / Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Marc Goess / Mn/DOT Area Engineer An equal opportunity employer 49 Attachment 25 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Chesapeake Companies Development Group, LLC, applied for a conditional use permit for a planned unit development to construct four restaurant/retail buildings for a development known as Chesapeake Retail Center. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 3091 White Bear Avenue. The legal description is Lot 1, Block 1, Maplewood Mall Addition. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On May 3, 2004, the planning commission reviewed this request and made a recommendation about this permit. 2. On May ,2004, the city council held a public hearing. 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 from the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 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. 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: Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department's April 26, 2004, engineering plan review as well as the following: A westward extension of the retaining wall south of Building D (Jared Jewelers). The retaining wall height must be sufficient to create a prevailing ground slope away from Building D, thereby deflecting a potential flow from a pipeline leak. An easement agreement that governs and provides for legal cross easements for parking, access, and utilities between all lots within the project. An easement agreement for the installation and maintenance of a freestanding sign on Lot 1 to benefit Lot 2. An owners association agreement specifying responsibilities for insurance, taxes and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities (including snow plowing). All 8-foot-wide parking spaces must be signed as either "employee" or "compact" car parking only. 6. Signage for Buildings B, C, and D are allowed as follows: One freestanding sign, 25 feet in height and 100 square feet in area. Freestanding sign height must be measured from building grade to top of the sign, not ground grade to top of sign. All three freestanding signs must maintain a 5-foot setback from all property lines. All three freestanding signs must have a decorative base construction of quality building materials to match the buildings. Three wall signs per building, per elevation. Size of the wall sign is limited to 20 percent of the gross wall area on which the sign is attached. Wall signs are not permitted on a canopy. All construction shall follow the plans date stamped March 30, 2004, with revisions as noted in this approval. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community DeVelopment may approve minor changes to the plans, including a change to the site plan for the proposed future driveway access onto White Bear Avenue, pending Ramsey County engineer and city engineer approval. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of city council approval or the permit shall end. The city council may extend this deadline for one year. 9. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on ,2004.