Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/24/2004. . . , . . . . AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, August 24, 2004 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers -Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Agenda Approval of the July 27, 2004, Minutes Design Review: a. Maplewood Cancer Center - 1580 Beam Avenue b. Cottages at Legacy Village - Hazelwood Street Visitor Presentations: None Scheduled Board Presentations: a. August 9, 2004, City Council Meeting (Chesapeake Retail Center) Staff Presentations: a. Sign Code Revision Proposed Timeline b. Reschedule the September 14, 2004, Community Design Review Board Meeting Due to Primary Elections (September 15 or 167) c. Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning Workshop -August 26, 2004 d. Community Development Bus Tour Review e. Community Design Review Board Representation at the September 13, 2004, City Council Meeting (Cottages at Legacy Village). 9. Adjourn MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Longrie-Kline called the meeting to order at 6'03 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Chairperson Diana Longrie-Kline Vice Chairperson Ledvina Board member Judy Driscoll Board member Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Shankar moved to approve the agenda. Chairperson Longrie-Kline seconded. Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar IV. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for July 27, 2004. Board member Driscoll moved approval of the minutes of July 27, 2004. Board member Ledvina seconded. Ayes --- Driscoll, Ledvina, OIson, Shankar Abstention - Longrie-Kline The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Maplewood Cancer Center- 1580 Beam Avenue Ms. Finwall said Minnesota Oncology Hematology is proposing an addition to the Maplewood Cancer Center located at 1580 Beam Avenue. Ms. Finwall said this project includes a 7,952- square-foot addition off the back (south) side of their building. Community Design Review Board 2 Minutes 8-24-2004 Ms. Finwall said the addition is proposed to house radiation equipment currently being leased by the cancer center and operated out of a temporary trailer that is currently parked in the back parking lot three days per week. City staff recommends approval of the design review for the Maplewood Cancer Center with conditions. Board member Ledvina noticed on the site plan that the cancer center is removing half of the bituminous on the drive access adjacent to the construction and asked if that was to provide enough room to build? Ms. Finwall said the applicant could address that when they came forward to speak. Board member Olson said on sheet E2 of the lighting plan it shows the adjacent property owners' light fixtures on the median in between the two parking lots. She asked what those light fixtures looked like, the height of the fixtures, and if they were similar to the existing light fixtures proposed for relocation? Ms. Finwall said that those lights were approved with the Markham Pond Medical Office Building and the light pole is basically the same except that it is 25 feet tall. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Jim Jordan, Architect, Jordan Architects, One West Water Street, Suite 280, St. Paul, addressed the board. The reason they are removing the bituminous surface along the driveway is to extend the storm sewer system along the addition, which is shown on the utility plan. Board member Shankar asked if the two entrances from Beam Avenue were both to enter and exit or was it a one-way circulation? Mr. Jordan said those two entrances are both in and out with a right turn only. Board member Ledvina asked how tall the chillers would be? Mr. Jordan said the height of the chillers are roughly four foot square, there is one existing chiller that they will relocate and they will be adding a new chiller. Board member Ledvina said he noticed the building comes very close to the driveway and asked if the cancer center sees that as a concern with snow removal? Mr. Jordan said they don't see that as an issue here. Board member Ledvina said the southwest corner of the wall that faces west has no windows on it. He asked what the design rationale was for excluding the windows on that southwest corner? Mr. Jordan said that's a large x-ray room and the reason there are no windows there is for shielding purposes. Board member Ledvina said the exclusion of windows is a "use" issue then? Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-24-2004 Mr. Jordan said correct. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said staff has recommended that the rooftop units be screened; she asked how they propose to screen them? Mr. Jordan said they don't have a plan yet but will look at painting the units. Board member Shankar asked if the four handicapped stalls shown on the north side were existing spaces? Mr. Jordan said yes. Board member Shankar asked if the 3 three new stalls on the south side were close to the entrance of the building? Mr. Jordan said they aren't near an entrance but are near a walkway. Board member Shankar asked if those spaces were for employee or patient parking? Mr. Jordan said that area is for employee parking. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked if they had any alternative landscaping recommendations because of the staff recommendation not to use amur maple trees? Mr. Jordan said they would meet with the landscape architect and change that to another type of ornamental tree. Ms. Finwall mentioned somebody else in the audience wanted to speak regarding this proposal. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked them to address the board. Ms. Pat Wolf, representing Commercial Real Estate Services, the property management firm that manages the adjacent property immediately west of the site, addressed the board. She is here tonight representing the owner of that property. The proposed addition of the original building faces west. They are not in opposition of the addition but they have had an ongoing problem with the landscaping that adjoins their two properties on the west side. The problem is there is a grade change where the cancer center driveway is and their land. The landscaping is nothing but a weed patch in that location. They have been working with the cancer center to resolve the problem and the cancer center planted some wildflowers there but it's nothing but a large overgrown weed patch and is unsightly. This situation is unacceptable and the client she represents wants to go on the record stating their opposition of this addition as long as the landscaped area is kept unsightly. Chairperson Longrie-Kline thanked the representative for bringing this issue to the CDRB's attention. Ms. Finwall showed the board some photos of the unsightly landscaped area between the cancer center property and the property to the west. Community Design Review Board 4 Minutes 8-24-2004 Mr. Jordan said the area is basically wild growth on a steep hill. Board member Olson asked if they would be willing to add this to the landscape plan and work with the city and the representative to correct this problem? Mr. Jordan said that would be a question for the owner of the cancer center. A representative of the Maplewood Cancer Center from the audience stated they would be willing to work with the city to correct the landscaped area. Ms. Finwall said she believed that area was to be maintained as a grassy area according to the original plan and hasn't been maintained over time. There could be a condition of approval placed on this design review of the submittal of a landscape plan on the west property line to be approved by city staff and the city would work with the property owner to ensure that's done. The applicant could do something similar to what the Markham Pond Development did with rocks and native plantings that require minimal maintenance. Mr. Jordan said they would get their landscape architect to draw up some plans that would be acceptable to the city and the neighbor to ensure the landscape was acceptable to everyone involved. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said although this situation doesn't have any bearing on the proposal before the CDRB it would be in good faith for the applicant to work with the city and the neighbor to make things right since this was a left over problem from the past development. Mr. Jordan said it's a separate situation but they would work with the city and the neighbor to make things right. Board member Ledvina moved to approve the plans date-stamped July 23, 2004, for the Maplewood Cancer Center located at 1580 Beam Avenue. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: (changes made by the CDRB during the 8-24-04 meeting are underlined if added and stricken if deleted.) 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. , Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant must submit to staff for approval the following items: a. Proof of submittal of a copy of final plans to the Metropolitan Council- Environmental Services Department for sewer and water access charge adjustments. b. Revised building elevations showing the screening, or at a minimum, painting of the existing and proposed rooftop mechanical equipment to ensure screening from the street and/or property located to the south (Markham Pond Medical Office Building). c. Revised landscape plan showing the followinq. Replacement of amur maples with an alternative ornamental tree. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-24-2004 , , . Landscape screening in front of the ground chillers located on the west side of the buildinq if space permits. Work with the property owner to the west (Maplewood Professional Buildinq at 1560 Beam Avenue) to ensure appropriate landscaping along the west side of the Maplewood Cancer Center property (between the Maplewood Cancer Center's drive aisle and the Maplewood Professional Buildinq property). d. Watershed District approval. e. A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: a. b. C, d, e, exterior Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways. Install all required landscaping and an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. Screen or paint the rooftop mechanical equipment to match the building color. Install all required outdoor lighting. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b, The above-require 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 director of community development may approve minor changes. Board member Olson seconded. The motion passed. Ayes- Driscoll, Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar Community Design Review Board 6 Minutes 8-24-2004 b. Cottages at Legacy Village- Hazelwood Street Ms. Finwall said Larry Aim, representing Southwind Builders, is proposing to build 33 for-sale townhomes on a 4.6-acre site on the east side of Hazelwood Street, south of County Road D. Ms. Finwall said the project is between Hazelwood Street and the recently approved Heritage Square part of the Legacy Village PUD. City staff recommends approval of the design review with conditions. Board member Shankar said these units appear very close together and he assumed they met the city's minimum setback requirement? Ms. Finwall said this is being approved as a PUD with some variation to the city's ordinance. If the applicant had to follow the city standards they would require a 20-foot setback from each unit. As proposed the units are about 17.7 feet apart. Because it would be approved as a PUD there is some flexibility to the change in code. Board member Olson asked if the driveways were long enough for a car to park? Ms. Finwall said the driveway pads are short which had been a concern of city staff. There isn't room for parking in the driveways, however, there is on-street visitor parking on Legacy Parkway and Hazelwood Street. The applicant states the reduction in the size of the private driveways helps reduce the cost of the units. It also keeps the exterior storage of vehicles to a minimum, which is why many of the homeowners choose to purchase units like this. Board member Olson said the limited guest parking concerns her because of the proposed density and thinks it's unrealistic to think that people wouldn't have gatherings here. She wondered where the overflow of cars would park? Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Larry Aim, Southwind Builders, White Bear Township, addressed the board. Board member Olson asked how the applicant calculated the parking for the site? Mr. Aim said there is no overnight parking and cars must be parked in the garage. If you have a gathering there is on-street parking available. The buyers for these homes don't buy this size of a home and entertain a lot. The typical buyer for these homes are people that are retired or people that have no children. Having short driveways for these units allows them to have 58% more green space for the courtyard. Board member Ledvina asked if the applicant had building material samples to show the board? Mr. Aim didn't have samples of building materials, however, he had a colored illustration to show the board. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked if the only extra parking would be on the street? Community Design Review Board 7 Minutes 8-24-2004 Board member Olson said there is no overnight parking and there is no outdoor storage? Mr. Aim said that's correct. It's an effort to keep the neighborhood as it was built and as it was designed. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said her concern is if someone had their mother or father spend the night, and you can't park a car in the driveway, and you can't park overnight on the street, where would that person park? Mr. Aim said in the association documents it states you can receive special permission from the association to park overnight on the private street within the development but not on the public streets. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked if the association documents were already written and in place? Mr. Aim said they can't file the association documents until the plat is filed. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she really wants to make sure overnight parking is an option if it's needed and that it's documented in the association documentation. Board member Olson asked where the meters would be located and what type of screening was proposed for them? Mr. Aim said he hasn't proposed any screening yet because he gets in trouble with the utility company for putting things in front of the meters. Depending on how the site gets laid out the sides of each garage building will house the electric, gas, cable and telephone hook up and would be located three to four feet at the end of the garage. Board member Olson asked if the applicant would be amenable to screening the meters with a small wooden Victorian style fence to fit in with the development? Mr. Aim said they have used maintenance free fencing. The worst part about townhome developments when you add things like wooden fences is they require maintenance. Landscaping is less expensive but then there is also the growth factor and requires trimming. Board member Driscoll asked if the applicant knew what type of trees and the height and width the trees could grow to that are shown to be planted between the units. She is concerned because Ms. Finwall said there is only 17 feet between units. Mr. Aim said they would probably plant ornamental trees because they don't get too large, such as a flowering crab tree Board member Driscoll said she doesn't profess to know too much about landscaping but on the plan it calls out for an ash tree and a sugar maple, which can be large trees. Mr. Aim said that would have to be changed by the landscape architect. Community Design Review Board 8 Minutes 8-24-2004 Board member Ledvina said having the stone go from the ground to the eave and then having another siding insert above the garage door seems too busy to him. He was wondering if you could fill the area above the garage door in with brick or use wainscoting. He has seen where the brick goes all the way up but they don't infill above the garage door, which he doesn't care for. Either the brick should run all the way up or another alternative should be to use wainscoting. The wainscoting may be a good alternative if the applicant wants to use a change of building materials. Board member Olson said she would agree with Board member Ledvina. Mr. Aim said he agreed that wainscoting may be the way to go. Board member Olson said she likes the concept and the idea of the individual units and the variety of styles and designs that are scattered through the development. The only concern she has is the onsite parking and this could spill over into a city problem if it isn't addressed correctly. Board member Ledvina said he thinks this is an interesting design; he likes the layout and thinks it's an efficient use of space and likes the idea of short driveways. People buying into this development are going to understand the concept of having the short driveways and the association bylaws. With this alley type of feeling the developer is increasing the green space and that's an efficient use of the space. He understands the concern for parking but thinks the applicant addressed that and if you're buying into this concept you understand the rules. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said with regard to Board member Olson's idea of shielding the utility meters with some kind of fencing would be a good idea. She understands the landscaping covering the meters concept, however, the board has had a problem in the past with the landscaping plan showing the meters covered but that didn't happen. Board member Shankar said his experience has been if you use fencing to cover utilities the meters get covered up but the cable and telephone hook up gets put outside the fenced area and is still visible. He would recommend the meters be put on the side of the garage and paint them to match the buildings. Board member Ledvina said the board has seen that solution but using 33 fences would not work with this development and he would agree with Board member Shankar to paint them to try and make them less intrusive or develop a screening solution with landscaping. He would be concerned with multiple meters but doesn't think that is the situation here. Mr. Aim said it would be a good idea to paint the meters and the utility meters don't care if you paint them as long as you leave the window visible so that may be a good solution to the problem. The meters have to be four feet off the ground so a person going up to the meter can read the dial easily. Board member Driscoll said she just wants to make sure the applicant reevaluates the tree species so they would not be crowding the buildings. Community Design Review Board 9 Minutes 8-24-2004 Board member Ledvina said he thinks the city staff can take a look at that situation and work with the applicant. Board member Olson said the larger trees should be okay planted at the end of the units and closer to the street Board member Olson moved to approve the project plans date-stamped July 22, 2004, for the Cottages at Legacy Village on Hazelwood Street. This approval is subject to the developer or contractor meeting all the following conditions: (changes made by the CDRB during the 8-24- 04 meeting are underlined if added and stricken if deleted.) , Obtaining city council approval of a comprehensive land use plan revision from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential) to build townhomes on the site. 2. Obtaining city council approval of a planned unit development for this project. 3. Obtaining city council approval of the preliminary plat for this project. 4. Complete the following before the city issues a building permit: a. Have the city engineer approve the final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, drainage, sidewalk, utility, driveway, parking lot and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with the city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. These shall include the normal water elevation and 100-year water elevation. (b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" vegetation rather than using sod or grass. (e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-24-2004 (f) lO Show as little disturbance and tree removal as possible on the north, east and south sides of the site. (3) The tree plan shall: (a) Be approved by the city engineer before site grading or tree removal. (b) Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. (c) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (d) Be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans. (4) The developer shall be responsible for getting any needed off-site grading or drainage easements and for recording all necessary easements. (5) All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter. (6) The driveways shall meet the following standards: 24-foot width--no parking on either side and 28-foot width-- parking on one side. The developer or contractor shall post the driveways with no parking signs to meet the above-listed standards. (7) The developer shall disturb as little as possible of the area along the north, east and south property lines and the applicant shall change the grading plan for this part of the site as recommended by the city engineer. b. Submit an in-ground lawn-irrigation plan to staff showing the location of sprinkler heads. c. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction. d. Submit a revised landscape plan for city approval showing: (1) As much of the existing vegetation (including the trees) remaining along the northern, easterly and southerly property lines as possible. (2) Foundation plantings near and around the buildings. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-24-2004 (3) The in-ground lawn-irrigation system. (4) Larger tree sizes (2½ inch-caliper instead of 2 inch). (5) Replacing the Colorado Blue Spruce with Black Hills Spruce and Austrian Pines. (6) The planting of the correct size and species of trees between the townhomes to ensure there is no overcrowdinq when full grown. eo Submit a revised site lighting plan for city approval. This plan shall show how the lighting on the buildings would add to the site lighting, and the plan should have additional lighting near the driveways, where they intersect the public street, so the driveways are adequately lit. This plan also shall show details about the proposed light fixtures to ensure they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent residential properties. Have the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) approve the proposed utility plans. g. A letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. Staff shall determine the dollar amount of the escrow. h. The developer shall close on the purchase of the properties with the city before the city will issue a grading or a building permit for the project. The contractor or builder shall meet all of the requirements of the fire marshal and building official. The applicant shall obtain all required permits from the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District. k. The applicant shall submit an address and traffic signage plan for staff approval. Submit revised building elevations for city staff approval. These elevations shall show the stone on the front of the attached garages to be installed as a wainscot to the heiqht of the trim board located on the sides of the units. m. Submit homeowner's association documents for city staff approval. These documents shall specify the availability of overniqht parking for the residents and guests on the private roads. 5. Complete the following before occupying the buildings: Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-24-2004 a, Install reflectorized stop signs at each driveway connection to Hazelwood Street and Legacy Parkway, a handicap-parking sign for each handicap- parking space and an address on each building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" and any traffic control signs within the site, as required by staff. b, Install and taper the concrete sidewalk along Hazelwood Street and Legacy Parkway to match the driveways. Co Install and maintain all required landscaping and an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas (code requirement). d. Install continuous concrete curb and gutter along all interior driveways and around all open parking stalls. e, Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and the nearby homes and residential properties. Install the trails and sidewalks as shown on the approved plans and as required by the city engineer. g. The developer or contractor shall' , , Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. Remove any debris or junk from the site. , 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 must meet the requirements of the city sign ordinance. 8. The city approves the setbacks as shown on the project plans. , All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 10. The city will allow a temporary sales office until the time a model unit is available for use. Such a temporary building shall be subject to the requirements of the building official. 11. No units facing Hazelwood Street shall have utility rooms or exposed utility meters on that elevation. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-24-2004 ]3 12. The applicant shall work with staff to propose suitable screening for outside utility meters. This may include painting of the meters and other utilities alonq the side of the garages plus addinq landscaping in front of the meters as may be needed. 13. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spring or summer. Co The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. Board member Ledvina seconded. Ayes - Driscoll, Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar There were three friendly amendments made and those have been incorporated into the conditions and are underlined per city staff. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on September 13, 2004. Mr. Aim said they were waiting to hear the chosen light post style the city council decided on for Legacy Parkway because they would like to use the same style lighting in this development. Ms. Finwall said the city council decided on the Domas style light post with neutral colors and the decorative items on the top portion of the post. They also requested a fixture that would direct the light downward. Mr. Aim said if it's feasible for them to do that they would. Board member Olson said she would've liked to see a finished product but would agree to have city staff work with that issue. With developments as large as Legacy Village as well as this proposed development she would've preferred that the board could see the finished product. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-24-2004 ]4 VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS a. August 9, 2004, City Council Meeting (Chesapeake Retail Center) Board member Shankar was unable to attend the August 9, 2004, meeting so Ms. Finwall reported that the sign plan for the multi-tenant building was approved and the Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant building redesign was approved with discussion regarding the change in building design compared to the original design plan Board member Olson received a letter from a resident in Maplewood regarding the Transfiguration Church's proposal for a senior housing development. She asked staff to fill the board in on the proposal and the status of the project. Ms. Finwall said the planning commission reviewed the proposal to redevelop the Transfiguration Church at 935 Ferndale Street to a three-story, 44-unit senior cooperative building. The Nichols Development presented this proposal on Monday, August 16, 2004. The PC recommended denial of this proposal with a 5-4 vote. The Transfiguration Church is proposing a neighborhood meeting, scheduled for August 31, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the school basement. They will be sending notices out to the residents. That item will be heard by the CDRB at their first meeting in September and will be heard by the city council on Monday, September 27, 2004. Chairperson Longrie-Kline discussed the meeting regarding the Legacy Village Sculpture Park and the upcoming plan. Chairperson Longrie-Kline along with Board member Olson attended the meeting and she wanted residents to know the city is looking for residents to get involved with the sculpture park planning process and funding. Interested parties should contact Bruce Anderson in the Parks and Recreation Department at the City Hall. People could also go to the City of Maplewood website to find out more about the park. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Sign Code Revision Proposed Timeline Ms. Finwall reviewed the sign code study and timeline overview done by Rose Lorsung, the planning intern. This will be discussed at the meeting Tuesday, September 21,2004. b. Reschedule the September 14, 2004, CDRB meeting due to Primary Elections Ms. Finwall had rescheduled the meeting for Wednesday, September 15, 2004, however that is the evening of the Board Appreciation dinner. The meeting has since been rescheduled for Tuesday, September 21,2004, at 6:00 p.m. c. Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning Workshop - August 26, 2004. Ms. Finwall reminded board members of the upcoming Gladstone Neighborhood Workshop Thursday, August 26, 2004, at the Maplewood Community Center Banquet Room from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Community Design Review Board Minutes 8-24-2004 ]5 d. CDRB Bus Tour Review Ms. Finwall asked board members how they liked the annual city bus tour and said if they had any comments or ideas for next year's tour to let her know by telephone or e-mail. el CDRB Representation at the September 13, 2004, City Council Meeting (Cottages at Legacy Village) Board member Olson will represent the city council on September 13, 2004. The only item to discuss is the Cottages at Legacy Village on Hazelwood Street. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m.