Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/27/2004AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, July 27, 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 June 22, 2004, Minutes Design Review: a. Legacy Village Concept Lighting Plan b. Chesapeake Retail Center - 3091 White Bear Avenue 1) Buffalo Wild Wings Restaurant 2) Multi-Tenant Building Maplewood Auto Center - 2525 White Bear Avenue None Scheduled Visitor Presentations: Board Presentations Staff Presentations: a. b. Sign Code Revision Update Community Development Bus Tour - Wednesday, August 11, 2004 (5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.) Adjoum I1. III. IV. MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JULY 27, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Diana Longrie-Kline Acting chairperson Ledvina Board member Judy Driscoll Board member Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Staff Present: Absent Present Present Present Present Shann Finwall, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary Rose Lorsun.q, Planning Intern APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Olson moved to approve the agenda. Board member Shankar seconded. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for June 22, 2004. Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar Chairperson Ledvina requested a change to the minutes on page 9, 5th paragraph to clean up the wording in the second sentence. It should read: However, the ideal situation would have been re-have the development of the front lots and this back lot (~-Nepe~ at the same time. Board member Shankar moved approval of the minutes of June 22, 2004, as amended. Ayes --- Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar Board member Driscoll seconded. The motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. II Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 2 VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Legacy Village Concept Lighting Plan Ms. Finwall said the Maplewood Public Works Department is proposing to develop design standards for street lighting in the Legacy Village development area. Street lighting is proposed to be installed as part of the city's improvements along Kennard Street between Beam Avenue and County Road D and along Legacy Parkway between Hazelwood Street and Southlawn Drive. City staff has retained the consultant team of Kimley-Horn & Associates and Cain-Ouse Associates to assist in the development of a master street lighting plan for Legacy Village. Kimley-Horn and Cain-Ouse are currently investigating options for the street lighting. In addition, they will also develop street lighting standards for the Legacy Village Development under the direction of staff, the Community Design Review Board and the City Council. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Jon Horn, of Kimley-Horn & Associates addressed the board. Their hope is to take this lighting plan to the city council on August 9, 2004, for city council approval. If this is approved they will begin taking bids with the hope that the street lighting would be installed late this fall or early winter 2004, however, some of the lighting may be delayed until spring 2005 in coordination with some of the other construction activity. Mr. Cain said he had three street lighting options to present to the board for feedback. Chairperson Ledvina asked if there would be street lighting on both sides of the street? Mr. Horn said the intention from maintenance prospective, is to have the street lighting installed on the outside curb lines of Kennard Street. Chairperson Ledvina was under the impression the developer is coordinating and funding the construction of Legacy Parkway. He asked why the developer was not proposing the street lighting? Mr. Horn said the piece of Legacy Parkway through the Town and Country development is actually a city improvement project. The funding mechanism is assessed through the developer and the developer is paying the bulk of the cost and the lighting is being constructed as part of the public improvement. However, the developer is doing the landscaping in the area. Chairperson Ledvina presumed the applicant was in close contact with the developer in terms of their ideas on how this works with their design and with the buildings? Mr. Horn said they've had conversations with the Hartford Group and Town and Country Homes in terms of their intention for the street lighting design as well as the landscaping. The Hartford Group has provided some general thoughts and ideas of which they are addressing with the lighting options. Town and Country Homes was in general agreement with the lighting choices but they are looking for direction and receiving ideas from the board. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Mr. Jay Cain, of Cain-Ouse Associates addressed the board. He had three different lighting options to show the board. The first option was a more traditional light called the Sun Valley Lantern. It is a cast aluminum pole with a high-pressure sodium lamp. One disadvantage with this type of light is that it has a visible light source and is more expensive because it would require more lamps to be used. An advantage is that the light source is only 12 to 15 feet from the ground and is a more Iow key light source. Board member Olson asked if this type of lamp is easily breakable? Her concern was kids throwing rocks at the glass and breaking it and what the expense would be to replace the glass. Mr. Cain said that's an important consideration with this type of lamp. He wasn't sure but he believed the glass was tempered glass. Board member Olson asked if the city would be responsible for replacing and fixing the lamps or would the developer incur the cost? Mr. Cain said the city would own and maintain these lights on the main streets and be responsible for the maintenance. Board member Shankar asked what color the light poles would be? Mr. Cain said the exact color has not been determined yet but they would use a conservative color. Board member Shankar asked if they would be using more than one color light pole? Mr. Cain said the intent is to use one color for all of the light poles. The second lighting choice is called Domas. This light is made of aluminum and the light source is high-pressured sodium. Because this light has a concealed and downcast light source, you cannot see the light source. They would require fewer lampposts with this type of lighting. There is a shepards hook at the top of the lamp where they could put a logo or piece of metal. They could also add decorations like a maple leaf on the top of the lamp. He did not have a sample of this type of decoration to show the board but described what it could look like. Board member Olson asked who would be determining the light color?. Mr. Horn said they would like light color ideas as well as design details from the board. Board member Driscoll asked if the Domas light had to have a concrete base as shown in the example? Mr. Cain said no, in fact they would use a pre-engineered steel base that is screwed into the ground and the electricity goes up into the hollow cylinder of the post. Board member Driscoll asked what other colors the Domas light post was available in other than the blue that was shown in the photo? Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 4 Mr. Cain said they could get the light posts in just about any color. But they haven't had discussions regarding color preferences. Mr. Cain said the third lighting option is called Harmonia. This light is a bit contemporary and old fashioned at the same time. It has a visible light source, is a very popular light fixture used in developments and comes in unlimited colors. Board member Driscoll asked why seeing the light source can be a disadvantage? Mr. Cain said some people think if you can see where the light source comes from it's the wrong type of lighting. There is a movement called the Dark Sky Movement to prevent lighting from polluting the night sky and the visibility of the stars. Some people prefer more of a down cast light and some like it to shine outward. Some angles of light can be a distraction or a nuisance. Chairperson Ledvina said whichever lighting is selected the lighting should be as efficient as possible. The light should be directed downward and to the intended area you're trying to light as opposed to fully directional luminescence fixtures. He prefers a more traditional light fixture with a downward light. So far none of the samples shown are his preference. Mr. Cain said there are different things they can do with the light fixtures to alter the appearance. They can't change the light direction but they can make it better. Board member Shankar said the Sun Valley Lantern is too traditional for him and prefers the Harmonia light fixture. Board member Shankar, OIson and Chairperson Ledvina said they didn't prefer the Domas light fixture because it was too plain and needed more ornamentation. Board member Olson said she didn't care for the Domas or the Harmonia. She would like to see a light fixture that blends the best of the three lights together. She was uncomfortable with the glass globes hanging down and felt it could invite future high maintenance issues for the City of Maplewood. Mr. Cain asked board members if there were more decorative features added to the Domas light fixture would they then be okay with it? Board member Olson said she is concerned with the style of the light fixtures and the residents having light shining into their homes with the units built so close to the roadway. Mr. Cain said the residents would not be flooded with light using the Domas light fixture; and using the Harmonia and the Sun Valley Lantern they would only be slightly affected. The advantage of using the Domas light fixture is that the light is directed downward. Chairperson Ledvina said he would further encourage the involvement of the developer in these discussions for a final decision. They've spent a lot of time with the design and will have some very good ideas in terms of lighting styles and how it fits in with the land use plan for their structures. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Mr. Horn said he understands the board's comments that the Domas lighting series would work if it was more decorative and as it stands the Domas fixture doesn't add enough character to the area. He also understands the board that the Sun Valley Lantern and the Harmonia would be more of a maintenance issue and the light extends outward instead of downward. In order for the board to select one of the choices something would have to be done to fix the issues they described. Board member Driscoll said personally she liked the Sun Valley Lantern design. Chairperson Ledvina said he is concerned about the efficiency of the lighting and is not sure how the design feature of the lamp would work in the development. Mr. Horn said they would need to run through a cost analysis as well before making a decision on the lighting. Board members said they prefer earth tones or a darker color light fixture with a satin finish. Board member Driscoll said there might be another vendor that has more of the lighting features the board is looking for. Mr. Cain said it sounded like the board would like the lighting to be more dressed up and that the light shines downward. Board member OIson asked if the lighting plan would be coming back to the board after they made a final decision? Mr. Horn said they were hoping to work through the issues with the developer and bring this to the city council on August 9, 2004. Board member Olson said she thinks the metal insert detail in the Domas light fixture is an excellent idea and would've liked to see a sample of what they had proposed to use. Mr. Horn said they could come back to the board and show them the metal insert detail options separate from the lighting fixtures themselves. Other cities that have used the Domas lighting fixture with the metal insert detail are Arbor Lakes in Maple Grove and Burnsville Center in Burnsville. Board member Olson said she would like to see a maple leaf cut out to replicate the city logo and would like to see a finial at the top of the light fixture. Mr. Cain said they could do that. Chairperson Ledvina and Board member Driscoll agreed with the decorative suggestions. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 b. Chesapeake Retail Center- Buffalo Wild Wings Restaurant Ms. Finwall said on May 24, 2004, the city council approved the Chesapeake Retail Center development located at 3091 White Bear Avenue. Land use approvals included a preliminary plat, planned unit development, and design review of three buildings including Jared Jewelers, TGI Fridays, and Buffalo Wild Wings. Because of Buffalo Wild Wing's change in their corporate building image, Chesapeake Companies is now requesting an amendment to the community design review board conditions in order to construct an alternative Buffalo Wild Wings building design. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Jeff Wurst, Development Manager, Chesapeake Companies, Minnetonka, addressed the board. He thanked the board for the opportunity to bring this design back for review. He said there are two other representatives from Buffalo Wild Wings here to answer questions and recommended Mr. Doug Paquay come to the podium to speak. Mr. Doug Paquay, Director of Construction, Buffalo Wild Wings, St. Louis Park, addressed the board. On the east and west elevation they plan on adding the same awning and window treatment that they have on the front or north elevation. They will put a set of windows with the awning and window treatment shown on the front elevation on either side of the bump out to equalize the building. Chairperson Ledvina asked if they are agreeable to the brick wainscoting on the east elevation where the bump out is going to be located on the ring road. Mr. Paquay said they were receptive to the brick, but would suggest only a 2-foot high wainscot. In the past using the brick wainscoting up to the windows has made the building look heavy at the base of the building. The windows are almost 3¼ feet high on the building. Board member Shankar asked if the yellow, black and white colors shown on the plans would be constructed of EIFS? Mr. Paquay said the black and white shown is done with metal panels inset in the EIFS. The yellow and brown portion of the building shown is done in EIFS and then there is a brick base. The awnings over the window will be black and yellow. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the yellow squares on the building elevations would be built of EIFS? Mr. Paquay said the yellow squares are made of a LED square panel of light that would glow at night. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the yellow squares could be added to the west elevation? Mr. Paquay said probably. They are going to have false windows on that side of the building so it may not be necessary to add squares there. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 7 Chairperson Ledvina asked if the applicant had revised elevations for the board to review this evening? Mr. Paquay said no he did not. Chairperson Ledvina asked if this building design had been built anywhere else? Mr. Paquay said they have buildings with this design in Irving, Texas and in Georgia, but they have not built this new design anywhere in Minnesota. Board member Olson asked staff if the yellow squares that are lit with LED lights fits in with the photometric plan? Ms. Finwall said any wall pack lighting would have to be included in the photometrics plan. Mr. Paquay said the LED lights are so faint they would not even register. Board member Olson said the CDRB recommended to the city council that they allow a four- foot high fence around the patio area. The council wanted a six-foot high fence because of the liquor license. She asked if the design of the fence area would still be six feet high even with the brick at the base, the glass, and then the black checkering along the top? Mr. Paquay said yes. The panels of glass are made of tempered glass. The city council wanted a fence but Buffalo Wild Wings wanted to be able to see the patio so they chose to use the tempered glass. Mr. Wurst said the staff recommendation is to replace the CMU around the bottom perimeter of the building with brick and Buffalo Wild Wings is willing to do that. From an architectural standpoint they request that the brick not be carried up to the bottom of the windows but rather remain at the existing height as shown with the new brick material. The recommendation is based on the architecture of the building and that the width along the bottom of the building meshes with the other architectural features. He would ask that the applicant not be required to install a window on the south elevation because they don't feel it's necessary with the landscaping, and trash enclosure screening in that location. Board member Shankar moved to approve Chesapeake Companies' proposed design review change for a revised Buffalo Wild Wings building at the Chesapeake Retail Center located at 3091 White Bear Avenue. These changes are based on the revised Buffalo Wild Wing's building elevations and landscape plan date-stamped June 28, 2004. The developer or owner shall do the following: (changes made during the 7~27~04 community design review board meeting are underlined if added and stricken if deleted): 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). 2. Submit the following to city staff prior to issuance of a grading or building permit: Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 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. Obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the existing Maplewood Movie I Theatre building. c. Obtain the required Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District permits. Submit payment for all required Park Access Charges (PAC fees) as specified in the Park Director's April 14, 2004, correspondence to Chesapeake Companies. eo 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 owner's association agreement specifying responsibilities for insurance, taxes and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities (including snow plowing). h. Submit a revised site plan showing the following: 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. 3) 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. 4) 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). 5) The extension of the sidewalk in front of Building A (future retail/restaurant) onto the County Road D trail. 6) A pedestrian access extending from the White Bear Avenue sidewalk. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 A revised landscape plan, subject to review and approval by staff, that shows the following: 1) Pending a shared driveway scenario with Arby's, a revised landscape plan showing the area of disturbance and landscaping proposed. 2) 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. 4) 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. 5) An underground irrigation plan to ensure all landscaping is irrigated per city code. Revised building and dumpster enclosure elevations showing the following: TGI Fridays: 1) Removal of the EIFS building material and replacement with ef brick, granite, and/or stone building materials and consistent building detail, including parapet walls, on all elevations of the building. 2) 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: 1) 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: 1) The removal of the split face C.M.U. on all elevations and the replacement with a brick wainscot. T~, ...................... ..... ...,; .... .. ..* .... ....* ~,..~..,.,~..... ~, ........ , ~'""'"""~ ~"~'"'r"'~" *,-,... +~,,-.,,.. bcffcms cf thc ,::indcws. The brick must be compatible with the building. 2) The addition of windows (either true or false windows), or other design elements to help break up the wall on the sc,Jib, west, and east elevations. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 l0 3) The addition of yellow LED panels to the west elevation. 4_)3) The removal of the concrete masonry block under the Plexiglas fence, and replacement with brick, which is compatible with the building. The overall height of the fence is not to exceed 6 feet. 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. 6_). 6-)-A 6-foot high fence around the proposed outdoor patio to be approved by the city council prior to issuance of a liquor license for Buffalo Wild Wings. 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. 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. 3. Prior to issuance of sign permits, the following must be submitted: a. Sign elevations for Buildings B, C, and D 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. The TGI Friday's and Jared Jeweler's freestanding signs must maintain a 5-foot setback to the White Bear Avenue right-of-way and a 10-foot setback to all side property lines. The Buffalo Wild Wing's freestanding sign must maintain a 1-foot setback to the County Road D right-of-way and a 5-foot setback to the side property line. All three freestanding signs must have a decorative base constructed of quality building materials to match the corresponding buildings. 2) Three wall signs per building, only one 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. b. A detailed landscape plan for the base of all three proposed freestanding signs. 4. Complete the following before occupying the buildings: a. Install all required exterior improvements. b. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets. 5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 ]! 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. 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. Board member Driscoll seconded. Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on August 9, 2004. 2) Multi-Tenant Building Ms. Finwall said on May 24, 2004, the city council approved the Chesapeake Retail Center development located at 3091 White Bear Avenue. Chesapeake Companies is now requesting design review approval of their proposed multi-tenant building to be located on the northwest corner of the site. The proposed multi-tenant building will be 9,620 square feet in area and 22 feet, 8 inches in height. It will be constructed of face brick, an exterior insulation finish system (EIFS-a stucco like material), colored rock face, and clear glass windows. Because all four elevations of the multi-tenant building will be very visible, each elevation should be constructed of the same quality materials. Staff recommends that the west elevation (toward the Maplewood Mall private road) be revised to reflect a 2-foot, 8-inch high colored rock face wainscot on the bottom of the wall (matching the other three elevations), with the remainder of the wall, up to the EIFS, constructed of face brick. In addition, staff recommends additional screening of the mechanical units with an extension of the parapet walls or other means. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the board would see signage on the south elevation of the building? Ms. Finwall said staff recommends wall signage be located on the east and west elevation facing the parking lot and the ring road. Board member Olson asked staff what type of signage would be used on this multi-tenant building? Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Ms. Finwall said currently the code states the signage can be up to 20% of the gross wall area for the tenant frontage, which could include a cabinet sign or individual letters. Chairperson Ledvina asked if this type of building qualifies for a comprehensive sign plan? Ms. Finwall said the city sign code requires a comprehensive sign plan for multi-tenant buildings with five or more tenants but staff is not sure how many tenants they plan on having in this multi-tenant building. However, because of the overall PUD and sign requirements the CDRB in essence is approving a comprehensive sign plan. Board member Shankar asked if staff is recommending that the parapet walls extend up all around the building? Ms. Finwall said staff was recommending additional screening to screen the mechanical units on the roof of the building, which could be done by extending the parapet walls around the roofline. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Steven Doughty, Architect with Pope Associates, St. Paul, addressed the board. They have a materials board for the board to review. They have adjusted the roof and parapet wall elevation, which will screen the rooftop units. Regarding the signage they will have a junction box provided at each sign location on the front and west elevation and prepped for each tenant's internally illuminated sign. Board member Olson asked if they had a standard size they would propose the tenants conform to or would they allow the tenants to chose their sign preference? Mr. Wurst said the plan for the building would be to have the signs consistent with the individual tenants trademark identity signage. That was approved by the city council for the three other buildings and they contemplated doing the same for the multi-tenant building. They will follow the city sign code but beyond that they did not anticipate any additional restrictions other than using the 20% coverage of the tenant wall space. Board member Olson asked if they were proposing to use a standard illuminated box that the clients can screen their personal Iogos on? Mr. Wurst said the intention was to allow the tenants use their trademark signage whether it is channel letters or cabinet type signage. This is consistent with the way the TGI Fridays, Buffalo Wild Wings and Jared Jeweler buildings had been addressed for signage. Board member Olson said however, those are three individual building units and this is a single building structure. Mr. Wurst said he understood. Mr. Wurst said they have not marketed the building at this point but he imagined there would be four maybe five tenants in the building. The multi-tenant building exceeds the height of a typical sized building so the building is already taller and would be adequately screened so you could not see the rooftop units on the roof of the building. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Board member Driscoll said she is concerned about the signage on the building because it sounds like there can be variations in color and materials used. It seems like this is such a big portion of the building and maybe this should be addressed. Mr. Wurst said the Simon Property owners group of the Maplewood Mall stated they have a preference for individual channel letters. The signage for the building has to go through the City of Maplewood for approval and to the Simon Property group for approval. To an extent they are being policed by the Simon Property group with their preference for channel letters, which governs the overall mall area. Chairperson Ledvina asked staff for comments on the comprehensive sign plan and the elevations. Ms. Finwall said staff recommended the face brick on the west elevation be substituted for the rock face because of the visibility of that elevation to the Maplewood Mall ring road. However, staff originally required trees and other landscaping along that elevation, which would help screen the area. Because this is a PUD, the city was able to require specific sign conditions, so the sign requirements are in essence a comprehensive sign plan. She would recommend individual channel letters be used as opposed to the cabinet style signage. If the board wanted to include that language it could be added to page 4 item 3. Chairperson Ledvina agreed with staff's recommendation to have a darker brick on the west elevation. He thinks it would help to improve the overall visual impression of the building. He thinks the west elevation should look like the east elevation and should have the darker brick brought all the way up the column. He would also support staff's recommendation for the signage and feels it should be consistent. Board member Olson agreed. She would rather see a variety of signage on the building and not see uniform signage all the way across the building in the same color and lettering such as the St. Paul Business Center off 35E and Roselawn Avenue. Mr. Wurst asked the board if it would be okay for Chesapeake Companies to work with staff on the sign plan? Chairperson Ledvina said that would be agreeable to the board. Mr. Wurst said the applicant would prefer to use a quality material other than the brick product the board is recommending to use. Using the thicker brick product would decrease the size of the interior of the building. Board member Shankar asked if they would be opposed to the 2-foot 8-inch high rock face CMU band on the west elevation? Mr. Wurst said they are supportive of a rock cast product could continuing around the west elevation to be consistent with the rest of the building. Mr. Doughty said if they use the rock cast product that would be a 4-inch veneer that would add to the depth of the building and would reduce the size of the building by 4 inches. They would prefer to use the rock face block and match the cream colored block. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 14 Board member Shankar said his personal feeling is that would add the required amount of differentiation the board is looking for without adding brick on the west side. Board member Olson is okay with changing the color on the top of the columns. She asked if the board is requesting the applicant add wainscoting all the way around the back of the building? Board member Shankar said yes the applicant should add wainscoting 2-feet 8-inches high. Board member Olson is fine using a veneer product but the issue of changing the structural parts from rock cast to a block with a veneer product sounds like the applicant preferred not to do that. Her concern is that the products match in color or texture if at all possible. Board member Shankar asked if the applicant could go over the materials board. Mr. Doughty reviewed the materials as they would be used on the building. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant if they were really that concerned about adding four inches to the building exterior, which equals 50 square feet less in a 10,000 square foot building? Mr. Doughty said yes they are. Board member Shankar moved to approve Chesapeake Companies' multi-tenant building and landscape plans date-stamped May 27, 2004, to be located within the Chesapeake Retail Center development at 3091 White Bear Avenue. The developer or owner shall do the following: (changes made during the 7127104 CDRB meeting are underlined if added and stricken if deleted,) Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for the multi- tenant building. 2. Submit the following to city staff prior to issuance of a grading or building permit: 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. Obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the existing Maplewood Movie I Theatre building. c. Obtain the required Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District permits. Submit payment for all required Park Access Charges (PAC fees) as specified in the Park Director's April 14, 2004, correspondence to Chesapeake Companies. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 eo go 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 owner's 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: 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. 3) Pending continuation 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). 4) The extension of the sidewalk in front of Building A (future retail/restaurant) onto the County Road D trail. 5) A pedestrian access extending from the White Bear Avenue sidewalk. A revised landscape plan, subject to review and approval by staff, that shows the following: 1) Pending a shared driveway scenario with Arby's, a revised landscape plan showing the area of disturbance and landscaping proposed. 2) Seven additional trees on the west side of the property, between the sidewalk and the Maplewood Mall road. 3) Additional plantings in front of Jared Jeweler's dumpster enclosure to help screen the enclosure from White Bear Avenue. 4) 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. 5) An underground irrigation plan to ensure all landscaping is irrigated per city code. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Revised building elevations to be approved by staff prior to issuance of a buildinq permit showinq the following: 1) The west elevation (toward the Maplewood Mall private road) must be revised as follows: ao A 2-foot, 8-inch-high colored rock face wainscot on the bottom of the wall (matching the other three elevations). b. The colored rock-face C.M.U. extendinq from the rock face wainscot to the EIFS must be of a color that matches or is compatible to the darker brick on the buildinq. Co The pilasters must have a 2-foot, 8-inch-hi.qh colored rock face wainscot with fact brick extendinq from the rock face wainscot to the top of the pilaster. 2) ...... , .... n .... ,~, .... o,,o Revised elevations of all sides of the building showing the drop of the roof elevation and extension of the parapet walls to ensure screeninq of the rooftop mechanical equipment from White Bear Avenue and County Road D. 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. I. 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 for the multi-tenant building, the following must be submitted: Sign elevations and plans for one freestanding sign, which cannot exceed 25 feet in height and 150 square feet in area. The freestanding sign height must be measured from building grade to top of the sign, not ground grade to top of sign. The multi-tenant freestanding sign must maintain a 1-foot setback to the County Road D right-of-way and a 5-foot setback from the private mall road. The freestanding sign must have a decorative base constructed of quality building materials to match the multi-tenant building. A comprehensive siqn plan showinq the proposed sign elevations for all tenant i.q °~"" ig wall s ns. -. *,,--,,* ,.,-. ,,.=..s. Wall s ns limited to two wall signs per tenant. Wall signs can be placed on the east and west elevations only. Size of the wall sign is limited to 20 percent of the gross wall area of each tenant frontage. Wall si.qns are limited to Ioqos and channel letters only. Wall signs are not permitted on a canopy. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 ]7 4. Complete the following before occupying the buildings: a. Install all required exterior improvements. b. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets. 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 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. 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. Board member Driscoll seconded. Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on August 9, 2004. c. Maplewood Auto Center- 2525 White Bear Avenue Ms. Finwall said on April 22, 2003, the community design review board (CDRB) approved a comprehensive sign plan amendment and design review change for the Maplewood Auto Center located at 2525 White Bear Avenue. A condition of approval was that Building A (auto repair building) be repainted in its entirety within two years of the date of approval (April 22, 2005). If new colors were proposed for the building, the community design review board must review the change. Ms. Finwall showed a current photo of the Maplewood Auto Center to the board and provided a paint sample of the new paint color in beige. Board member Olson said the applicant has had a lot of mechanical problems with their freestanding sign at Maplewood Auto Center and she is happy he is fixing up the sign. Board member Olson moved to approve Brian Pellowski's request for a design review change for the Maplewood Auto Center at 2525 White Bear Avenue to include painting Building A from green to beige subject to the following conditions: (approved CDRB changes to the original conditions are underlined if added and stricken if deleted): Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Approval of the plans by the Community Design Review Board does not constitute approval of a building permit. All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screening enclosures with a 100 percent opaque wooden gate and shall be a color and material compatible with the building. Enclosures shall be protected by concrete-filled steel posts, or the equivalent, and anchored in the ground at the front corners of the structure. If the enclosure is masonry, the protective posts may be omitted. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, all dumpsters must be stored within the approved dumpster enclosure. Any exterior building or rooftop equipment that is not adequately screened by the parapet shall be additionally screened and hidden from view. Parking areas shall be striped and all bituminous areas shall have continuous concrete curbing. Parking lots shall be kept in a continual state of repair. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, the applicant must repair and restripe the entire parking lot to include repair of replacement of all concrete curbing. This work must be done prior to issuance of sign permits for the Super America sign changeover, or after submittal of a letter of credit or escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the required work. o If construction has not begun within two years of approval, board review shall be repeated. ° Site security lighting shall be provided and shall be directed or shielded so not to cause any undue glare onto adjacent properties or roadways. If any adjacent property is disturbed or property irons removed due to construction of the site, that property shall be restored and irons replaced by the applicant. Grading, drainage and utility plans shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. Any erosion control plan, acceptable to the city engineer, shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit for erosion control during construction. ° The curb cut along White Bear Avenue shall properly blend in to match the sidewalk grade. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the applicant shall obtain approval from Ramsey County for the curb cut and for the realignment of the drainage ditch. 11. The exit to White Bear Avenue shall have only one exit lane, a no left turn sign and stop sign. 12. All grass areas along the south and east lot lines shall be sod, not seed. Those areas adjacent to the ditch shall be sod or seed. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 13. All required landscape areas shall be continually and property maintained. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, the applicant must ensure that all previously required landscaping is installed and/or maintained. The city will retain the August 24, 2004, letter of credit for the required landscaping until such work is complete. 14. All required plant materials that die shall be replaced by the owner within one year. 15. Reflectorized stop signs and handicap parking signs shall be provided. 16. All public boulevards that are disturbed due to this construction shall be restored and resodded. 17. The applicant shall provide a monetary guarantee, in the form acceptable to staff, in the amount of 150 percent of the established cost of any site improvements that are not completed by occupancy. 18. The parking stall depth and drive aisle widths north and south of Building B shall be 19 feet and 24 feet. 19. There shall be no outside storage or displays of products or merchandise. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, all outside storage and unlicensed vehicles must be removed from the site. 20. Building A and the pylon si.qn in front of Buildinq A must be painted the followinq colors by October 15, 2004: Upper and lower fascia: bei.qe (Apache 432) Trim, garage doors, and bollards: green Upper face of pylon sign: beige (Apache 432) 21. Prior to approval of the April 22, 2003, design change, Building B must be painted the following colors: white on the top fascia, garage doors, window trim, bollards and wall lights; light grey on the middle section of the block; and red on the top flashing. Elevations showing the above-described colors for Building B must be approved by staff. This work must be complete prior to issuance of sign permits for the Super America sign changeover, or after submittal of a letter of credit or escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the required work. 22. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-27-2004 Board member Driscoll seconded. The motion passed. VII, VISITOR PRESENTATIONS VIII. IX. 20 Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Olson, Shankar No visitors present. BOARD PRESENTATIONS Board member Olson announced that the city council decided they would not be voting for the chairpersons on each board and commission. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Sign Code Revision Update Ms. Finwall introduced Ms. Rose Lorsung, Planning Intern, to the board. Rose has been working on the Maplewood Sign Code Study and presented her report. The board said they appreciated the work that was done on the sign code. The board will review the packet of information and return to the CDRB meeting on August 24, 2004, with questions and concerns. b. Community Development Bus Tour - Wednesday August '11, 2004, (5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.) Ms. Finwall reminded board members of the annual city tour and asked which members would be attending. c. Community Design Review Board representation at the August 9, 2004, city council meeting. Board member Shankar volunteered to be the CDRB representative at the August 9, 2004, city council meeting. Items to discuss include the Chesapeake Retail Center at 3091 White Bear Avenue for Buffalo Wild Wings Restaurant and the Multi-Tenant Building. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.