Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/08/2004AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, June 8, 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 May 25, 2004, Minutes Design Review: a. The Myth Nightclub- 3090 Southlawn Drive Visitor Presentations: None Scheduled Board Presentations Staff Presentations: a. CDRB Ordinance and Rules of Procedure Changes b. CDRB Representation at the June 28, 2004, City Council Meeting Adjourn II. III. IV. Vw DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Longrie-Kline called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Diana Longrie-Kline Vice-Chairperson Ledvina Board member Judith Driscoll Board member Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary APPROVALOFAGENDA Board member Shankar moved to approve the agenda. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Driscoll, Longrie-Kline, Olson Shankar The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for May 13, 2004. Board member Olson had a change to the minutes on page 2 in the first paragraph, 2nd line. Please strike the words the city in the middle of the sentence. Board member Olson moved approval of the minutes of May 13, 2004, as amended. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes ---Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar, Abstention - Driscoll The motion passed. DESIGN REVIEW a. Heritage Square Town House Development - Legacy Village Mr. Ekstrand said Town and Country Homes is proposing to build for-sale townhomes on the portion of the Legacy Village PUD (planned unit development) that was previously approved for rental townhomes and an executive office site. The office site was proposed on 1.5 acres of this 20-acre site. The applicant is proposing to build 178 townhomes. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 2 Mr. Ekstrand said this site was previously approved for 198 townhomes and the office building. This proposed change requires the following approves from the city council: A revision of the Legacy Village PUD for the change in ownership/rental status as well as revision of the commercial site to residential use. A comprehensive plan amendment to build townhomes where the executive offices were previously approved. This would be a change from BC (business commercial) to R-3H (high density residential). 3. A revised preliminary plat for the new lot line configuration. 4. A revised flat plat. 5. Site, building and landscape plan approvals. The planning commission will review the first four requests. Staff will review these in a separate report. At this time, the applicant is requesting that the community design review board review the site, building and landscape plans. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she couldn't tell by looking at the color renderings if there was any brick used on the building elevations so she asked if staff knew the answer? Mr. Ekstrand said the applicant could answer that when they have the opportunity to speak. The applicant brought a materials board for the board to see. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked staff if they knew how many proposals the board has required brick to be used in some form on the building elevations? Mr. Ekstrand said the city has had a record of requiring brick to be used at least as an accent material and often times used as a wainscot below to replace concrete block elements. The city requires brick to be used on the building elevation to a certain degree. Mr. Ekstrand said it wouldn't be out of line to require brick to be used in some form on the buildings. He didn't mention it in his report because he thought the buildings have a lot of design and character already. Board member Olson asked if these units would be rented or sold? Mr. Ekstrand said these units would be for sale. Board member Olson asked if Phase 1 for Legacy Village was for sale or rent? Mr. Ekstrand said those units are for sale as well. Board member Olson asked how much of the Legacy Village development is handicap accessible because it appears that the plans the board has reviewed so far have all been multi-level homes. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 Board member Olson said she didn't bring that issue up in Phase I because she thought Phase II would have accessible housing units but now she doesn't see any in this proposal either and this concerns her. Mr. Ekstrand said perhaps the applicant could address that. Board member Olson asked if there was a minimum percentage of handicap accessible housing that the city code requires for new developments? Mr. Ekstrand said no typically there isn't. It's something that can be considered but there is no code requirement stating there needs to be so many handicap accessible units. Board member Olson said that concerns her. She expected to see some handicap accessible housing somewhere in this Legacy Village development. Board member Shankar asked how the traffic would flow through the area. He asked if the traffic would go to Kennard Street or to County Road D and Highway 617 Mr. Ekstrand said the extension to Highway 61 for County Road D is under construction. Phase I for the Legacy development has begun and the roadway should be drivable by the end of this year. By the time the developer has a number of units to warrant traffic circulation the roadwork will be completed. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked what the square footage of this development would be? Mr. Ekstrand said he would ask the developer to answer that question. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Kevin Clark, Director of Land Development, Town & Country Homes, 7615 Smetana Lane, Suite 180, Eden Prairie, addressed the board. He said the grading has begun for Heritage Square and is close to completion. The County Road D grading should start at the end of June to early July and should be done by the end of the construction season. As soon as the ground dries up more they will start putting in the underground elements. They are going by the plans previously approved by the Hartford Group regarding accessibility. This is the first community they would be building the Majestic Collection product in. The approval of the site was not slatted for a one level building project, which is the reason they haven't proposed a one level building product for this project area. Board member Olson said she understands it's not his fault but she would like to severely scold whomever it is that dropped the ball on this. She can't see a development of this size without one-level handicapped accessible housing. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the design review board doesn't have control over this particular aspect of development but they can voice their concerns. Board member Shankar said he believed the city code would require a certain amount of handicap accessible units for each development and before the building permit can be released the building official would require a certain number of units to be accessible. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 4 Board member Olson said the board hasn't had an opportunity to review these plans and she knows this is not his fault. She said to have this issue come up at this late of date really bothers her. Mr. Ekstrand said this is a valid point and the city should have been looking at the handicapped accessible housing issue over a year ago. The issue over a year ago was with housing affordability and the number of affordable units to have in the development. The first project they had to provide at least 50 affordable housing units and another development will have to provide 50 additional affordable housing units. Board member Olson asked if all affordable housing homeowners have to be able to walk stairs? Mr. Ekstrand said the CDRB minutes would reflect these concerns and staff would pass these on. He said he wasn't aware of a building code requirement for a certain number of handicapped accessible units. Board member Olson asked if there was any way the city could go back to Phase I and require handicapped accessible units? Mr. Ekstrand said no it's too late. Board member Olson said there is no Phase III so apparently it's too late to require handicapped accessible housing for this large development. Mr. Clark said there is additional housing to be built in Legacy Village, which would have handicapped accessibility as an element. Mr. Ekstrand said there is an apartment that is part of the Hartford's proposal that is 50 units that east of this project. If the apartment building is a multi-story building it would have an elevator, which gives accessibility to the floors. Board member Olson said she was thinking of high quality retirement housing. If there is stairs in every single multi-level unit, retired people would have a problem, which is a concern of hers. Mr. Clark said regarding the question about brick, they are introducing stone elements on the building, which is a split-faced block along the lower four feet of the building. Because of technology the color renderings didn't make it evident that split-faced block would be on the exterior. They had proposed to use a gray split-faced block but found the color gray washed into the siding color too much and prefer the appearance of the dark tan block instead. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said because of the color copies the colors tend not be the same as the actual building sample colors. That is another reason why the board really appreciates building samples as part of the review process. Mr. Clark said the question was asked earlier regarding square footage for these units. The units are going to be 1,800 square feet to 2,500 square feet with the basement finished. The price range for the Majestic Collection is proposed at a range of $225,000 to $245,000. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 Board member Shankar asked what landscaping would be used under the decks? Mr. Clark said they wouldn't be laying sod; they may use mulch of some sort and possibly some plantings. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she is assuming there would be an association for this development. Mr. Clark said they would use the same homeowner's association for both developments in Legacy Village. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked if the applicant could discuss the room on the end of the units that would hold the utility meters? Mr. Clark introduced Mitch Littfin who would speak more on the utility rooms. Mr. Mitch Littfin, Regional Architect with Town and Country Homes, addressed the board. He said these buildings would have a fire suppression system in them so they need to put the system someplace where it can be accessible to the fire department. The can carry that stone element out and use landscaping and/or fencing to shield the gas meter, telephone and junction boxes. They can't put the gas meters in an enclosed area because there isn't enough ventilation. They are working on those dynamics with the fire life safety but understand the need to shield those meters. They will either extend the stone like a retaining wall off the edge or put a fence around that area to shield it. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said from her perspective the board wants to make sure the meters are enclosed some how and using the block elements seem consistent with what they are doing with the other enclosures. Board member Olson said she is concerned about the safety of these security boxes and how many keys would be out in the public. She wants to ensure if a corner area is built kids would hide there. Screening the meters is a priority so the meters wouldn't be visible from the street because that could attract vandalism. Mr. Clark said the fire marshal is the only person with the key for the fire suppression system. They are looking at the options of what boxes they can have on the interior and which ones have to be on the exterior. Such as cable boxes and telephone boxes so there is less stuff on the outside wall. There are certain space and distance requirements by both Xcel and the fire department so power and water is separated. The proximities of the electricity and water will dictate where the locations end up. Board member Olson said in the color handouts they received this evening there were four different color schemes to look at but she only sees three color schemes on the building materials board. Mr. Clark said there are only three colors to be used for the building materials. They aren't using the blue color scheme. The building materials board they brought this evening show the different combinations of color schemes that would be used on the buildings. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 Board member Shankar asked if there would be exterior lighting on the building? Mr. Clark said yes there would be entryway lighting and sensor lighting that would come on at dusk and shut off at dawn on the garage exterior. The units that have porches will also have an exterior light. Board member Driscoll asked for a clarification regarding the materials and color schemes to be used. It was hard to distinguish from the color renderings. She said it appears to be three different finishes but they show two in the color photos so she is confused. Mr. Lifftin pointed out for the front elevation the teal green color is used for the siding and is the base color and the tan color is the shake product and will offset the green. It is separated by a white band board and on some gable ends as well. Because of the shadowing effect it appears to be three finishes but really is two finishes. Board member Driscoll asked what the purpose of the retaining wall south of wetland F was and how high the wall would be? Mr. Clark said the purpose of the retaining wall is for the topography and grade of the site. Based on where the water from the site goes dictates how deep the pipes have to be. If they are able to dig the pipes deep enough will depend on the placement of the elevations. They have to work with the city engineering department on this. They also have to have the sidewalk at a certain elevation. As you move further away from the building the grade drops so the walls are holding the grade up in order to have the sidewalk in that location. In some cases they are creating the elevation and also trying to accommodate the elevation. Board member Driscoll asked if they had determined what the walls would be made of? Mr. Clark said they will use a modular retaining wall system because those types of walls allow engineering to tell you where the wall should go, what backfill is needed, and how long the fabric is that ties into the wall that holds them in. Boulder walls are not engineered. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the rear of the property by the garage the building exterior appears to be all one-color siding. In the past the board has requested that the applicant extend the brick building material around the end of the building for added durability. Mr. Lifftin understood what the board was referring to. On the rear elevation they broke up the exterior by bringing the windows out, adding the gables, and boxing out the windows on the end units and awnings over the garages. They chose to use more architectural features to break up the back of the building rather than changing the texture or the color. To break up the middle units they chose to use a different window trim. They believe it's a nice combination of architectural details with fewer embellishments on the rear. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said in many of the developments approved by the board they have recommended that brick is added to the side and rear elevations for added durability. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 7 Board member Shankar said in previous developments the reason the board has recommended extending the brick was because they were using one color of siding and there wasn't much architectural detail on the building. In his opinion this development has more architectural enhancements and there is no need to require the extension of the block. Board member Olson said she thinks the applicant did an exceptional job with this development and it doesn't bother her that there isn't the stone element on the rear elevation. She likes the porches, overhangs and the attention to detail given to the front of the units and she is very happy with the presentation. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she thinks the enhancements are very nice as well. Board member Driscoll said she likes the architectural details and felt this was a nice plan. Mr. Ekstrand said the front elevations are nicely enhanced, he likes that the back elevation is hidden, the end elevations are highly visible and appear to be very plain. This is a concern of his because there are a lot of end units that am exposed to both County Road D and Hazelwood. Maybe some thought could be given to what can be done to solve this problem. Board member Olson said the board has approved less appealing end units than this proposal. She is very comfortable approving this development if them is appropriate landscape provided. Mr. Littfin said the appearance of the end units is also dependent on the location of the meter rooms. The meters could be located on either the end unit A or end unit C depending on where the utilities come through. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she is concerned with the view people will have driving by this development and it's the board's responsibility to make sure this development is as appealing as possible. Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date-stamped April 30, 2004, for the Heritage Square Second Addition, the second phase of Heritage Square Townhomes at Legacy Village. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: (changes to the original motion are in bold.) Obtaining city council approval of a comprehensive land use plan revision from BC (business commercial) to R-3H (high density residential) to build townhomes on the previously approved office site. Obtaining city council approval of a revision to the previously approved planned unit development for this project. 3. Obtaining city council approval of the preliminary and final plat for this project. Meeting the following site requirements from the Legacy Village PUD approval (these are subject to staff approval): There shall be an east-west sidewalk provided between Hazelwood Street and Kennard Street on the north/northwest side of the main east-west drive. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 There must be a sufficient number of convenient sidewalk connections from the buildings to the power line trail and from the buildings to the County Road D sidewalk. The north-south driveway between the easterly edge of this site and the adjacent commercial property and apartments must be constructed in their entirety with the townhomes. Parking spaces should be provided at the ends of driveways between buildings wherever possible. The infiltration trenches should be placed in accordance with the city engineer's approval, taking into account proper placement to accommodate trails and sidewalks and the function of the trenches. There must be a sidewalk to the south side of County Road D running from Hazelwood Street to the Southlawn Drive. · All trails must meet ADA requirements. Over-story trees along Street A, Street B and the west side of Street C (as shown on the previous rental-housing plan) must be planted at an average of 30 feet to 40 feet on center. As an exception to this spacing requirement, the boulevard trees along Kennard Street shall be planted according to the approved planting plan. The curve in the middle of Street A should be flattened as much as possible in an attempt to lessen headlight glare. Building setbacks are allowed to be no less than 15 feet from a street right-of- way to enhance the urban character of this development. There must be enough visitor parking spaces provided in groups of at least five that are no more than 200 feet form the front doors of all units. The main private driveways within this development must be at least 26 feet wide. Visitor parking areas must be installed in accordance with the city engineer's requirements of grading and drainage needs. An easement over the power-line trail must be provided to the city for access and maintenance. 5. All requirements of the fire marshal and building official must be met. The applicant shall obtain all required permits from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 7. 8. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18, 19. 20. All driveways and parking lots shall have continuous concrete curbing. All requirements of the city engineer, or his consultants working for the city, shall be met regarding, grading, drainage, erosion control, utilities and the dedication of any easements found to be needed. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project by that time. Any identification signs for the project meet the requirements of the city sign ordinance. The setbacks are approved as proposed. The applicant shall: · Install reflectorized stop signs at all driveway connections to Hazelwood Street, County Road D and Kennard Street. · Install and maintain an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. · Install all required trails, sidewalks and carriage walks. · Install any traffic signage within the site that may be required by staff. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan for staff approval before getting the first building permit. The applicant shall submit an address and traffic signage plan for staff approval. The applicant shall provide the city with cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the exterior landscaping and site improvements prior to getting a building permit for the development. Staff shall determine the dollar amount of the escrow. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. A temporary sales office shall be allowed until the time a model unit is available for use. Such a temporary building shall be subject to the requirements of the building official. The applicant shall work with the city staff to shield the gas and electric meters especially for the end units facing County Road D or Hazelwood Street, The board approved the use of the tan rock face stone in place of the originally specified gray color, The Board is concerned about the lack of handicapped accessible units as part of the 178 units. The applicant shall provide accessible units if required by the building code, Community Design Review Board Minutes 5-25-2004 l0 Board member Driscoll seconded. Ayes - Driscoll, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. This item goes to the planning commission on June 7, 2004, and to the city council on June 14, 2004. VI. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. VII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS Chairperson Longrie-Kline was the CDRB representative at the city council meeting on Monday, May 24, 2004. The expansion for Mounds Park Academy was approved ayes all with a lot of discussion regarding the access in and out of the school and how the change in the parking would alleviate the problems the school has had. The Chesapeake Retail Center passed ayes all. The city council decided that the sign setback should have a one-foot setback as opposed to the zero setback recommended by the board. Both the board and staff recommended the fence around the patio area at Buffalo Wild Wings should be four feet tall but the police department recommended it should be six feet high. In the end they decided to wait until the liquor license is applied for before a decision was made. VII. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. New Member Orientation Mr. Ekstrand welcomed our newest board member Judy Driscoll and discussed the new member orientation and the policies and procedures for serving as a board member for the CDRB. b= Board member Shankar will be the CDRB representative at the June 14, 2004, City Council Meeting. Board member Shankar will attend the city council meeting at 7:00 p.m. and board member Driscoll will observe the process so she understands her role as a board member at future city council meetings. The only board item to discuss is the Heritage Square Townhome Development for Legacy Village. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:44 p.m. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM Richard Fursman, City Manager Shann Finwall, Planner Design Review for The Myth Nightclub Reg Plowman, RJ Marco Construction, Inc. 3090 $outhlawn Drive June 1, 2004 INTRODUCTION Reg Plowman of RJ Marco, representing Mike Ogren and Noah Castle (property owners), is proposing to remodel the Just for Feet building at 3090 Southlawn Drive, into a nightclub called The Myth. The owners are purchasing the adjacent vacant lot located to the north of the site for an expansion of the existing parking lot. (Refer to the applicant's letter and plans attached on pages 11 through 25.) BACKGROUND October 1997: The Community Design Review Board (CDRB) approved the design review of a 16,819-square-foot, two-story, Just for Feet shoe store located at 3090 Southlawn Drive. The CDRB also approved the overall site plan that included a future 37,526-square-foot building north of the Just for Feet building. The development was to be called the Maplewood Plaza. November 1997: City staff approved a lot split to create the future building site north of the Just for Feet building. July 1998: The CDRB approved a comprehensive sign plan for the Maplewood Plaza development. March 1999: The owner of the Just for Feet building requested a variance from the concrete curbing requirement for a portion of the Just for Feet site. The owner had installed bituminous curbing along the north edge of the parking lot which was slated for future development. The city council denied the variance, but approved an amendment to the city's ordinance that allows bituminous curbing on a temporary basis, when future development is pending. January 2004: The city council approved a liquor license for Noah Castle to operate a nightclub out of the existing Just for Feet building. Mr. Castle requested the liquor license before purchasing the property. DISCUSSION The applicants are proposing to add approximately 3,875 square feet of foundation area to the north side and 1,210 square feet of foundation area to the west side of the existing Just for Feet building. The northern addition would be three stories with a large skylight constructed above the third floor. The western addition will be two stories. The nightclub will have a large dance floor and state-of-the-art sound and light equipment. The operation of the nightclub will provide nightly entertainment with local and national DJs, as well as occasionally a national touring act. The nightclub's hours of operation will be from 7 p.m. to close (2 a.m.), Wednesday through Sunday, unless a national act is booked for a Monday or Tuesday. The nightclub also has the ability to be rented out to corporations for functions such as speaking engagements. The maximum capacity of the building will be 3,200 people (pending building official and fire marshal review). The owners have indicated that the expected occupancy during the regular dance nights will be from 700 to 1,000 people, and the expected occupancy during national acts will be close to the maximum capacity of 3,200 people. Parking City code requires nightclubs to provide one parking space per 50 square feet of patron area (areas open to the public). The architect for the project has calculated the patron area of the building at 18,566 square feet, creating a need for 371 parking spaces. This calculation will accommodate parking for the regular dance nights at the nightclub. The parking needs for the national act nights, however, should be based on the maximum capacity of the building. This calculation should reflect the number of people arriving in a vehicle; staff suggests four people per vehicle. The parking space requirement for national act nights would then be 800 parking spaces (3,200 maximum capacity divided by 4 people per vehicle = 800 spaces). With the proposed parking lot expansion, there will be 366 parking spaces on-site, with an additional 33 parking spaces available on the east side of the parking lot, that are actually located on the adjacent Toys R Us lot. The additional 33 parking spaces were approved with the original design review of the site, with a condition that cross easements for parking and access be obtained between the two properties. Overall parking available is 399 parking spaces, which meets the city code requirements for a nightclub. City records, however, do not reflect the existence of the required cross easements. Proof of signed easements should be a requirement of The Myth Nightclub design approval. In order to accommodate an additional 401 parking spaces (needed with national acts), the applicants are attempting to work with adjacent property owners to arrange for shared parking agreements. Parking agreements must be approved by the city council. The city council is scheduled to review the nightclub proposal on June 28, 2004. To date, the applicants have not been successful in obtaining such an agreement. In order to ensure that national acts (with large audiences) are not approved until the applicants have obtained the required shared parking agreements and these agreements are approved by the city council, a condition of the design review approval should be a maximum capacity of 1,000 people within the building. According to the city's building official, this condition can be placed on the certificate of occupancy, which can be changed to a higher capacity if and when the city council approves the parking plans to accommodate national act nights. Site Plan Because of future County Road D expansion plans, the city's engineering department has indicated a need for a 17-foot-wide right-of-way easement along County Road D. (Refer to the engineering review on page 26.) In addition, the engineering department has indicated a need for a 10-foot-wide pedestrian and utility easement along $outhlawn Drive. The applicants have The Myth Nightclub 2 June 1, 2004 accommodated for the 17-foot-wide right-of-way easement in their site plan, with the expanded parking lot setback 32 feet from the existing right-of-way (17 feet for additional right-of-way plus 15 feet for city code required parking lot setback to a right-of-way). The engineering department is also recommending that the applicants construct an eight-foot- wide trail/walkway off of County Road D and a six-foot-wide sidewalk off of Southlawn Drive as part of the nightclub approval. The required trails and sidewalks will benefit the nightclub patrons as well as the city as a whole. The requirement for a developer to install sidewalks and trails with new developments as needed has been city policy for the last few years in order to create a comprehensive trail and sidewalk system throughout the city. Building Design The existing building will be remodeled to include prefinished horizontal metal channel siding (dark blue), prefinished metal compost panels (light blue), 12" x 12" porcelain tile (dark blue), prefinished metal flashing (light blue), windows with a mirrored and reflective glass, the existing and new EIFS painted beige, and the existing metal frames around the windows painted black. The applicants are working on a materials board to present to the CDRB during the meeting. City staff finds all elevations attractive and in keeping with the style of an innovative dance club. Landscaping The city's tree preservation ordinance requires that all large trees be replaced one-for-one, not to exceed ten trees per acre. A large tree is defined as any tree with a diameter of eight-inches at a four-foot trunk height, excluding boxelder, cottonwood, and poplar. There are 44 trees to be removed from the site, none of which are considered large trees. The applicants are saving 28 trees from the original landscaping and planting 23 new trees. In addition, 20 new shrubs will be planted on the site, specifically on the northwest corner of the site. The applicants should submit a revised landscape plan that shows landscaping around the foundation of the building as well as an underground irrigation plan to ensure all landscaping is irrigated per city code. Lighting The lighting plan shows 15 freestanding lights and 18 wall-pack lights on the exterior of the nightclub. The city's lighting ordinance requires that these lights maintain a .4 foot candle or less of light illumination at all property lines and freestanding lights maintain a height of 25 feet or less. The proposed lights meet these requirements, however, a revised lighting plan should be submitted to ensure that the height of the freestanding lights is a maximum of 25 feet, including the base of the light pole. In addition to the above-mentioned lights, the applicant proposes backlight lighting within the skylight, located above the third floor. This lighting is proposed as part of the design of the building and will create a constant glow of white light, with no flashing or variation in colors. City staff is concerned with the proposed skylight lighting as it may pose a nuisance to future residential properties located in the proposed Legacy Village development to the west of the site, The Myth Nightclub 3 June 1, 2004 and may add to light pollution within the area. For this reason, staff is recommending photometrics and lighting plan details on the proposed skylight. This plan should include a description of the luminaire including wattage, the light spread and foot candle levels of the proposed luminaire, and descriptions on how the light will be designed, installed, and maintained. This level of detail is necessary to ensure that the proposed light will not cause light trespass or excessive light pollution. Trash Enclosure The applicants are constructing an addition on the west side of the building, over the existing loading dock/trash enclosure lane. A new trash enclosure will be constructed on the west side of the building. A detailed plan should be submitted to city staff for review which shows that the enclosure is large enough to accommodate trash and recycling, is constructed with materials to match the building with a height of at least six feet, and has a 100 percent opaque gate. Other Comments Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett, Police Department: Lieutenant Rabbett has submitted a memorandum of review for the proposed nightclub (refer to police department review on page 27). In general, the police department believes the nightclub will have a significant increase in the amount of nightclub-related police calls for service in the city. The police department recommends that a large contingent of security personnel be present, especially during national acts and that an extensive and technologically-advanced security camera system be installed that will record virtually all of the interior public spaces as well as entrances and the main parking area. The condition for security can be addressed in the city council's review of the parking agreements. The design review board should require that the applicants install the security system as part of the design review approval. Eric Korte, Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District: This project will require a grading permit from the watershed district to include hydrocalcs for the 100-year flood level on the pond based on the full development of the site and an erosion control plan for the disturbance of the area. David Fisher, Building Officiah Mr. Fisher has met with the applicants and the architect to discuss preliminary building code issues. Mr. Fisher also suggests a pre-construction meeting to discuss the following: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. There may be issues for accessible parking. The occupant load will affect the exit width. The occupant load will affect the bathroom count. An elevator will be required to the second level. The building is required to be fire sprinklered to meet NFPA 13. Emergency Public Address System is required for Fire Department use. Full fire alarm system is required. A grease trap may be required. Sound control should be addressed so noise does not leave the site. The Myth Nightclub 4 June 1, 2004 10. Building is required to meet 2000 IBC, 2000 IFC, 2000 IMC, NEC Minnesota State Plumbing Code, and the Minnesota State Building Code. Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal: 1. Monitoring of all parts of the fire protection system and fire alarm system will be required. 2. Fire alarm systems will be required per code. 3. Maintain 20-foot emergency access clearance to the building for emergency vehicles. 4. Fire protection systems will be required per code. 5. Large concerts where occupancy is 1,000 or more may require a special fire watch. 6. Emergency Public Address System will be required. RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans date-stamped April 29, 2004 and May 18, 2004 for The Myth Nightclub at 3090 Southlawn Drive. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant must submit to staff for approval the following items: a. A revised grading, drainage, utility, and erosion control plan to be approved by the city engineer which meets all requirements of the May 28, 2004, city engineering review. b. Revised building plans that meet all city building official and city fire marshal requirements, including the installation of an elevator and sound control within the building to ensure no noise leaves the site. c. A plan for a technologically-advanced security camera system that will record virtually all of the interior public spaces as well as entrances and the main parking area. The security camera system must be approved by the police department prior to issuance of a building permit. d. Proof of the combination of the two parcels into one parcel for tax and identification purposes. e. Proof of signed cross parking (33 parking spaces) and access easements with the Toys R Us property at 1852 County Road D. f. Dedicate and record a 17-foot-wide right-of-way easement along County Road D. g. Dedicate and record a 10-foot-wide pedestrian and utility easement along Southlawn Drive. h. A revised site plan that shows the following: The Myth Nightclub 5 June 1, 2004 o 1) A 17-foot-wide right-of-way easement along County Road D. 2) An 8-foot-wide trail/walkway within the County Road D right-of-way easement. This trail/walkway shall be constructed per the engineering department requirements as specified in the May 28, 2004, engineering review. 3) A 10-foot-wide pedestrian and utility easement along Southlawn Drive. 4) A 6-foot-wide sidewalk within the Southlawn Drive pedestrian and utility easement. This sidewalk shall be constructed per the engineering department requirements as specified in the May 28, 2004, engineering review. A revised landscape plan that shows landscaping around the foundation of the building as well as an underground irrigation plan to ensure all landscaping is irrigated per city code. A revised lighting plan that shows the following: 1) The height of the freestanding lights at a maximum of 25 feet, including the base of the light pole. 2) A detailed plan of the proposed skylight which gives a description of the luminaire including wattage, the light spread and foot candle levels of the proposed luminaire, and descriptions on how the light will be designed, installed, and maintained to prevent light trespass and light pollution. The skylight is limited to a constant glow of white light, with no flashing or variation in colors. A trash/recycling container plan showing that the enclosure is large enough to accommodate trash and recycling, is constructed with materials to match the building with a height of at least six feet, and has a 100 percent opaque gate. I. Watershed district approval. 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. The building permit will be conditioned on a maximum capacity of 1,000 people within the building, unless the city council approves a shared parking agreement to accommodate the parking needs of the national act nights or other events with more than 1,000 people at the nightclub. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: a. Install the eight-foot-wide trail/walkway along County Road D. The Myth Nightclub 6 June 1, 2004 o o Install the six-foot-wide sidewalk along Southlawn Drive. Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways and remove all existing bituminous curb from the site. Install all required landscaping and an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. Install reflectorized stop signs at both exits, a handicap parking sign for each handicap parking space, and an address on the building. Paint the rooftop mechanical equipment to match the building color. The applicant shall provide screening enclosures around the equipment unless the community design review board waives the screening requirement. Install all required landscaping. Install all required outdoor lighting. Install the required trash/recycling container. Installation and operation of an extensive and technologically-advanced security camera system that will record virtually all of the interior public spaces as well as entrances and the main parking area. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: ao 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 of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 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. This approval does not include signage. All proposed signs must comply with the city's sign ordinance and the applicant must obtain all required sign permits prior to installation. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The Myth Nightclub 7 June 1, 2004 CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the 10 surrounding property owners within 500 feet of this site for their comments on the nightclub proposal. Two replies were received as follows: Scott Uttley, Managing Partner, Best Western Maplewood Inn, 1780 County Road D: The only concern I have is with the parking. I did receive a letter from Mr. Marco stating that he'd like to discuss an agreement to use our parking, but have not spoken about this. Because our peak time for banquet and bar functions coincides with the nightclub's, we would not be in a position to offer any parking spaces, other than Sunday nights. DJD Partners III LP, cio Welsh Companies, Inc., 7807 Creekridge Circle, Minneapolis (owner of vacant lot to the north of the site - to eventually be combined with The Myth nightclub property): We have no objection to the proposed use/tenancy. It will be a favorable event to have someone utilize the former Just For Feet building. The Myth will provide a social and cultural outlet that is currently not served in Maplewood. Based on reports from the operator, it will be a first class facility with industry leading acoustics and amenities. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. The Myth Nightclub 8 June 1, 2004 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: Existing Land Use: 5.42 acres Vacant Retail Building SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: East: West: Maplewood Town Center- Frank's Nursery/Best Buy, etc. (zoned Business Commercial, BC) Best Western Maplewood Inn (zoned Business Commercial, BC) Toys R Us (zoned Business Commercial, BC) Ashley Furniture and Legacy Village Townhomes (zoned Planned Unit Development, PUD) PLANNING Existing Land Use Plan: Existing Zoning: Business Commercial, BC Business Commercial, BC CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Design Review Section 2-290 of the city code requires that the community design review board make the following findings to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments, and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. The Myth Nightclub 9 June 1, 2004 Application Date The city received the complete applications and plans for this development on May 18, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal. As such, city action is required on this proposal by July 17, 2004. P\Sec2N\The Myth 6-8-04 CDRB Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Applicant's Letter Location Map Zoning Map Land Use Map Existing Conditions Demolition Plan Site Plan Grading/Drainage Plan Utility Plan Landscape Plan Elevations First Floor Plan Second Floor Plan Third Floor Plan Engineering Department Review Police Department Review The Myth Nightclub 10 June 1,2004 Attachment 1 gJ MARCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. May18,2004 Ms. Shann Finwall City of Maplewood Office of Community Development 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Myth Nightclub Dear Ms. Finwall: The purpose of this letter is to address the parking issues for the above project as outlined in Paragraph 3 of your May 10, 2004 letter. The building will have 18,566 square feet available for public use. As I understand the City Code, we would need 371 parking stalls. Our plan shows 399 stalls. The building will have a permitted occupancy of 5,666 people based upon the exiting design. Based upon the toilet fixtures and using a factor of 40 square feet per fixture, we would have an occupancy limit of 3,200 people. As we have discussed, there may be times when national acts are booked at the nightclub that there will be a need for more than 399 parking stalls. We propose to address that issue by entering into license agreements with neighboring retailers and business owners. Some of those owners are not local and it will take time to work out the details of those licenses. In the meantime, I would propose that you permit us to proceed with this project with the understanding that a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until we reach an appropriate agreement with the City of Maplewood concerning the sufficiency of the license agreements which we intend to make. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Reg Plowmm~ President RJ Marco Construction RP:vlr 75W. Viking Drive Suite 104 · Little Canada, Minnesota 55117 · Phone (651)484-5635 · Fax (651)484-5701 11 Attachment 2 1-694 lacy )lewood Countv R )ad D 1 The Myth Nightclub (Existing Just For Feet Bldg.) 3090 Southlawn Avenue N Location Map 12 Attachment 3 1-694 COUNTY ROAD D N Zoning Map 13 Attachment 4 !-694 COUNTY ROAD D N Land Use Map 14 Attachment 5 Existing Conditions Attachment 6 N Demolition Plan 16 Attachment 7 PARKING 391 STANDARD STALLS 8 HANDICAP STALLS TOTAL 399 N Site Plan 17 Attachment 8 N Grading/Drainage Plan 18 Attachment 9 N S Utility Plan 19 Attachment 10 LANDSCAPE NOTES: PLANT SCHEDULE N Landscape Plan 20 Attachment ll NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16' = 1'-0" (WEST ELEVATION ~ SCALE: 1/16" = 1'~)" MATEP-..IAL INDEX A PREFINI..~HED HOP-.IZONTAL METAL CHANNEL 51DING 15 PREI=INI,~HED METAL COM?OSITE PANEL~ C I 2" x I 2" PORCELAIN TILE D ICY'NAR. I=INI~H ON EXISTING METAL ERAME WALL.5 E PRFFINI~MED METAL I=LA~HING P PREFINISHED 42" HIGH METAL GUARDRAIL G EXISTING M REPLECTIVE GLAd5 J TP-JkNDLUCENT ~ICYLtGMT IC L EXISTING P-.ETAINING WALL Elevations 21 SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" (~ EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16' = 1'-0" MATERIAL INDEX P'P-J~i=INISHED HOP-JZONTAL METAL CHANNEL 51DING PP-.EEINISHED METAL COM?O,~ITE PANEL.~ I 2" x I 2" POP-.CELAIN TILE KYNAP-. EINISH ON EXL~TING METAL PRAME WALL.~ PPJD=INIDMED METAL I=LA5PiING PRI~FINI~HED 42" HIGH METAL G UAP-.D P-,Al L EXISTING P~EFLECTIVE GLA~ TP-,AN.~LU CE MT ~ K.YLIGHT EXISTING RETAINING WALL 22 Elevations Attachment 12 N First Floor Plan 23 Attachment 13 / II it~ .... II "' ........ Ii- I~- II Ii-- N Second Floor Plan Attachment 14 N Third Floor Plan 25 Attachment 15 Eneineering Plan Review PROJECT: Myth Nightclub PROJECT NO: REVIEWED BY: Erin Laberee, Maplewood Engineering Department DATE: May 28m, 2004 Reg Plowman is proposing to convert the Just for Feet building at 3090 Southlawn Drive into the Myth Nightclub. The applicant is proposing to expand the parking lot into the adjacent property to the north, which they have purchased. Runoff from the proposed and existing parking lots will drain into an existing pond that was constructed as part of the Just for Feet development. The following issues shall be address. Streets The developer shall dedicate 17 feet of roadway and utility easement along County Road D and an additional 10 feet of pedestrian and utility easements along Southlawn Drive. Both easements shall be shown on the plat. An 8-foot-wide trail/walk shall be constructed off of County Road D. This is the location of a proposed trail identified in the Lake Links Trail Comprehensive Plan. 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). The trail shall be offset 1-foot north of the required roadway and utility easement. The elevation of the north edge of the trail shall be located between 0.8 feet and 1.3 feet above the existing top of curb. The proposed elevations of the parking lot may need to be revised to fit the elevation of the trail. A 6-foot-wide sidewalk shall be constructed off of Southlawn Drive within the required pedestrian easement. It is recommended that the applicant continue construction of the proposed sidewalk south to the existing parking lot. If the developer chooses to construct the sidewalk further south than their property, it shall be constructed within the existing right of way. The applicant shall obtain right of entry agreements from the adjacent property owner if construction encroaches onto the adjacent property. Drainage 1. The existing inlets to the ponds shall be cleaned and additional riprap shall be installed. 2. The pavement under the existing curb cut to the pond has been undermined. The applicant shall repair this area to prevent future undermining and erosion. Note: The existing storm sewer is undersized and cannot accommodate a volume increase that will occur as a result 0f [~ proposed parking lot expansion. In the event of a large rainfall, the parkilag lot will act as a surcharge basin. The city will not require the applicant to increase the existing 24-inch storm sewer. 26 Attachment 16 Memo To: Shann Finwall From: Lt. Kevin Rabbett /F~ Date: 4/26/04 Re: Project Review: Myth Night Club I have reviewed the attached plans and find several public safety concerns: This project will significantly increase the amount of nightclub activity in the City of Maplewood. Currently there are three such businesses, which have a combined capacity of about 1300 people. In 2002, approximately 225 calls for service could be attributed to night club related activity. My understanding is that the Myth Night Club capacity could be 3000, effectively tdpling the nightclub capacity in the City of Maplewood. The nightclub related police calls for service will most likely increase. These calls frequently require a response by two or more officers, which has a significant impact on the department's workload. Parking is another issue. It seems to be somewhat addressed by plans for a special agreement for shared parking with adjacent properties. However, the details of the plan need to be worked out. Pedestrian safety, traffic flow and lighting in the parking lots are among those details. Traffic flow in the adjacent area will be an issue especially when the national acts are on site. The late night timing of the exodus will help, but there is likely to be a higher percentage of impaired ddvers in the several hundred vehicles leaving the area. I would recommend that a very large contingent of security personnel be present, especially dudng the national acts. It is also likely that an increased number of on duty Maplewood officers may be needed during large attendance events. An extensive and technologically advanced secudty camera system should be installed that will record virtually all of the interior public space as well as entrances and the main parking area. This will be useful in the investigation of assault, fraud, theft and other criminal investigations. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at x2604. 27 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Planner City Code Amendments - Planning Commission and Community Design Review Board June 1, 2004 INTRODUCTION Request Staff is proposing that the city council amend several sections of the city code about the planning commission and the community design review board (CDRB). There are several sections of the code with language about the duties and chairpersons of the planning commission and CDRB. These code sections now say that the respective commission or board will elect or appoint the chairperson. To be consistent with the recent direction of the city council, the city needs to change the code to say that the city council will make such appointments. In addition, the planning commission CDRB should revise their respective rules of precedure to reflect the new policy of the city council. Reasons for this Request There are several parts of the city code that are not consistent with the directive of the city council. The council must change the code to make it consistent with their recent policy change. BACKGROUND Council's Directive On March 22, 2004, the city council reviewed the preposed policy for the appointment to Commissions and boards. The council made minor revisions and suggestions to the proposed policy to put them into effect. DISCUSSION As I have noted above, there are several sections of the code that the city council needs to change to meet their directive about the appointment of the board chairpersons. I have listed each of these sections in the proposed ordinance amendment. I also have proposed changes to the rules of procedure for the CDRB and the planning commission to reflect the policy change of the city council. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the proposed code amendments about the planning commission and community design review board starting on page three. Co For the Community Design Review Board (CDRB), adopt the proposed revision to their Rules of Procedure on page five. For the Planning Commission, adopt the proposed revision to their Rules of Procedure on page six. P:com dvmt\ord\PC and CDRB Code amend. - 2004 Attachments: 1. Proposed Code Amendment Ordinance 2. Proposed Revision to CDRB Rules of Procedure 3. Proposed Revision to the PC Rules of Procedure Attachment 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE MAPLEWOOD CITY CODE ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: Section 1. This amendment changes Section 2-249. Chairperson and vice-chairperson. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec 2.249 Chairperson and vice-chairperson. "~'" ."2 ...._.._ submit two names for nomination as The planning commission shall _-'!cc!.: _._~ ....... ~"" chairperson to the city council every two years. The city council will select the chairperson for the planning commission. The planning commission shall elect a vice-chairperson at the second planning commission meeting in January each year. The chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding at meetings and shall have an equal vote with other members of the commission. If the chairperson is not at a meeting, the vice-chairperson shall assume the duties of the chairperson for that meeting. If the chairperson resigns from or is otherwise no longer on the planning commission, the vice-chairperson shall become the acting chairperson until the city council can appoint a new chairperson. Section 2. This amendment changes Section 2-251(a) (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 2-251. Officers; meetings; rules of procedure. (a) The planning commission shall elect its own officers, except for the chairperson, establish meeting times, and adopt its own rules of procedure to be reviewed and approved by the city council. Section 3. This amendment changes Section 2-252 (9) (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 2-252. Duties and responsibilities. (9) Accept such other and further duties as may, from time to time, be directed by the city council ;"'"""; .... .~....~; ..... k,;.. k ...... - Section 4. This amendment changes Section 2-254. Responsibilities of community development director. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 2-254. Responsibilities of community development director. Subject to the direction of the city manager, the planning commission and its chairperson, the community development director or his/her designee shall: (Numbers 1-6 remain unchanged). Section 5. This amendment changes Section 2-284. Officers; quorum; changes to rules of procedure. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): (a) Chairperson, vice-chairperson. Every two years, at the .~.t c'.'c.~' second meeting in January, the community design review board shall _-'!cctc c..c!mc ..... c~'J_ select two names for nomination as chairperson to submit to the city council. The city council will select the chairperson for the community design review board. The community design review board shall elect a vice-chairperson at their second meetinR of the year. Section 6. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on Attest: Mayor City Clerk 4 Attachment 2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (CDRB) RULES OF PROCEDURE (The additions are underlined and the deletions are crossed out): IV. ELECTION OF OFFICERS The '"' .... ; ~ vice chairperson and such officers as the board may decide are needed, shall be appointed by the board at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve until their successors have been duly elected and qualified. The city council will select the chairperson for the board. The Community Design Review Board adopted this revision on June ,2004. Attachment 3 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMSSION (PC) RULES OF PROCEDURE (The additions are underlined and the deletions are crossed out): D. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A =.".=L~_--=cn, vice chairperson shall be elected by the commission at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve until their successors have been elected. The city council will select the chairperson for the plannin.q commission. The planning commission adopted this revision on June ,2004. 6