Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/26/1998 AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD May 26, 1998 6:00 P.M. City Council Chambers Maplewood City Hall 1830 East County Road B 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes - May 12, 1997 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Unfinished Business a. Billboard Request, 1255 E. Highway 36 (Metcalf Mayflower) - Universal Outdoor, Inc. and Alan Metcalf 6. Design Review a. First Financial Office Building - East of 2025 E. County Road D, Tony Sampair 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Board Presentations 9. Staff Presentations a. CDRB Representative for Council Meetings: Monday, June 8-Ananth Shankar Monday, June 22-Volunteer Needed b. Next CDRB Meeting is June 9 10. Adjourn p:com-dvpt\cdrb,agd MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MAY 26, 1998 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Erickson called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Marvin Erickson Present Marie Robinson Present Ananth Shankar Present Tim Johnson Present Matt Ledvina Present III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May12,1998 Boardmember Shankar moved approval of the minutes of May 12, 1998, as submitted. Boardmember Robinson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boardmember Johnson moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Boardmember Shankar seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Billboard Request, 1255 E. Highway 36 (Metcalf Mayflower) - Universal Outdoor, Inc. and Alan Metcalf Alan Metcalf, owner of Metcalf Mayflower, was present. Mr. Metcalf said that there was 9-1/2 years left on the lease they have with the Universal Sign Company and that Universal Sign Company has no intention of removing the sign. Mr. Metcalf said they may not be able to go through with the building project because their bank has told them they have to get a release from Universal Sign Company saying that they either would remove the sign or that the sign would be moved to another location. Mr. Metcalf said that if the sign were permitted to be moved they would guarantee that after the 9-1/2 year lease expired the sign would be removed and that there would be no other sign on their property by an outdoor sign company, such as, Universal. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 05-26-98 -2- Staff said they had approached Mr. Metcalf with the idea of an alternative location but Mr. Metcalf said that the sign company would not go with that location, it would be either as they proposed it or it stays where it is and then that conflicts with their building proposal. Staff recommended denial of the conditional use permit. Mr. Metcalf said the reason the sign company won't take the alternate location is because they feel it sets it back off the highway too far for visibility. Boardmember Robinson said that this issue came up a couple of months ago and she wanted to know why nothing was brought up at that time. Mr. Metcalf said that, at the time, the Universal Sign Company said that they saw no problem with it and they would apply for the permits. Metcalf didn't get involved until they found out the movement of the sign was not approved and that is when Universal said they were not going to move the sign. Boardmember Shankar asked how the existing location conflicts with the building proposal. Mr. Metcalf said that the present location of the sign, they feel, would detract from the appearance of their building. Boardmember Erickson asked if the new building could be moved back a little. Mr. Metcalf said if they moved the building back then they would cut down on the rentable space. Staff said the sign, if it were left where it is, would be right in the middle of the proposed parking lot. Boardmember Ledvina moved that the Community Design Review Board deny the conditional use permit for the relocation of the billboard on the Metcalf Mayflower property, 1255 E. Highway 36. Denial was based on the following reasons: The proposed billboard would not be located to be in conformity with the city code of ordinances because of its substantially reduced setback from the Metcalf Mayflower building. The applicant proposed an 11-foot setback--the code requires 100 feet. The proposed billboard would appear to crowd the building and, therefore, give a cluttered appearance. The city previously denied a conditional use permit for a billboard that would have had less aesthetic impact along Highway 36 than the proposed billboard. Boardmember Johnson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 05-26-98 -3- VI. DESIGN REVIEW A. Side Yard Setback Variance and Design Review- First Financial Center Tony Sampair, the applicant, was present. Mr. Sampair said that he could meet all of the recommendations in the staff report. Boardmember Ledvina asked if the driveway, that is blocked by the rock berm, would be eliminated. Mr. Sampair said they would be eliminating the driveway. Boardmember Erickson asked where the trash dumpster would be located. Staff said it would be located in the northeast corner and would have an opaque gate on the front of it. Boardmember Erickson asked if there would be a problem with cars coming into the parking lot at night and the lights shining across to the Emerald Inn. Mr. Sampair said they don't operate at night, their business hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., so this shouldn't be a problem. Boardmember Erickson asked about signage. Mr. Sampair said that in the front of the building there would be a pedestal sign with the name of the financial center and names of the tenants on it. The sign facing the freeway would say Remax. The sign on the building would say ReMax First on the side towards the freeway, lit up like the sign at the Emerald Inn but not as large. Staff stated that signage could be handled at staff level if there were no more than four businesses in the building. If there are five or more businesses it would have to come before the board. Boardmembers asked about the materials and colors of the building. Mr. Sampair said he didn't have samples with him but he could get them and give them to staff. Mr. Sampair said there would be no brick on the second level which was not shown on the plans date-stamped May 13th. They have decided to go with stucco on the second level because it would be more cost effective and it would not affect the appeal of the structure. Boardmember Robinson asked if anything else had changed on the plans. Mr. Sampair said there was nothing else. Boardmember Ledvina had concerns about the screening on the east side of the site. Staff said there was sufficient screening, in that, the dwelling on the east side was 225 feet away from the lot line and there are a lot of trees in between. Boardmember Ledvina would like to see conifer trees planted in this area. Mr. Sampair suggested that he could put in a three foot high berm and have the trees at the lower spots of the berm. The board decided to leave this open and suggested the applicant do what would be best to avoid problems down the road. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 05-26-98 -4- Boardmember Robinson moved the Community Design Review Board: Adopt a resolution approving a 20-foot side yard building setback variance and a five-foot parking side yard setback parking lot variance for the proposed office building project east of 2025 E. County Road D. Approval is based on the following reasons: Requiring side yard parking and building setbacks to meet code would result in an unattractive and ill-conceived site plan because the building would be crowded toward the west lot line. The adjacent lot to the east is planned for BC (business commercial) and will be considered for a land use plan change to BC in the near future by the city staff. Complying with the code would cause the applicant undue hardship because of the inconsistency of the zoning and land use designation for the lot to the east. The proposed variances would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance because the house on the abutting lot is 225 feet away and is screened by mature trees. Approve the plans date-stamped May 13, 1998, for the proposed First Financial building east of 2025 E. County Road D. Approval is based on the findings required by the code and subject to the following conditions: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit the applicant shall: a. Submit grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans for city engineer approval. b. Revise the site plan for staff approval by: (1) Omitting the driveway connection to the adjacent lot. (2) Adding one more handicap-accessible parking space for a total of 58 parking spaces. (3) Providing a 15-foot parking-lot setback from the north lot line. 3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: Install a handicap parking sign for each handicap parking space. Handicap spaces must comply with ADA requirements. One space must be van accessible. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 05-26-98 -5- Boardmember Ledvina seconded. The motion passed. b. Paint any rooftop mechanical equipment to match the color of the upper part of the building. (code requirement) c. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure to match the building with a 100 percent opaque gate. (code requirement) d. Install an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. (code requirement) e. Direct or shield the site lights so they do not shine in driver's eyes. f. Provide continuous concrete curbing around all parking lots and drives. g. Post the nine-foot-wide parking spaces for employees only. (code requirement) Parking spaces for visitors or customers must be at least 9 ~ feet wide. h. Sod all turf areas, including the boulevard, except planting beds if a different ground cover or mulch is to be used. 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 city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 200 percent of the cost of the unfinished work. Any unfinished landscaping shall be completed by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter or within six weeks if the building is occupied in the spring or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. Signs are not approved in this review. The applicant must submit the sign plans to staff for approval and obtain the necessary sign permits. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Plans shown with brick on the second story, at the applicant's request, we are approving no brick but stucco on the second story exterior. Ayes--all Community Design Review Board Minutes of 05-26-98 -6- VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS There were no board presentations. Xl. STAFF PRESENTATIONS A. Representative for June 22 City Council Meeting: Ms. Robinson will attend this meeting. B. The next Community Design Review Board meeting will be on June 9. X. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 6:55. p:com-dvpt\cdrb.min