Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/18/2000 AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD January 18, 2000 6:00 P.M. City Council Chambers Maplewood City Hall 1830 East County Road El 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: December 21, 1999 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Unfinished Business 6. Design Review a. Woodlynn Heights Townhomes, Woodlynn Avenue - PJK Realty b. 1999 Annual Report c. Election of Chair and Vice Chair 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Board Presentations 9. Staff Presentations a. CDRB Volunteer Needed for the January 24 City Council Meeting b. Reminder: The December 28 Meeting is canceled. c. January 19 Planning Commission Meeting: VVhite Bear Avenue Corridor Study 10. Adjourn p:com-dvpt~cdrb.agd MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA JANUARY 18, 2000 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Matt Ledvina Ananth Shankar Tim Johnson Jon LaCasse Craig Jorgenson Present Present Present Present Present (arrived at 6:05 p.m.) III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 21, 1999 Commissioner Shankar moved approval of the minutes of December 21, 1999 as submitted. Commissioner Johnson seconded. Ayes--all IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner LaCasse moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Shankar seconded. Ayes--all V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. VI. DESIGN REVIEW Ao Woodlynn Heights Townhomes, Woodlynn Avenue--PJK Realty Secretary Tom Ekstrand presented the staff report. Patrick Kinney was present to discuss his proposal. Mr. Kinney was agreeable to "beefing up" the landscaping to make it compatible with that of the existing townhouse units in the development. He did not have samples of the materials to be used or the exterior colors but said they would be earth-tone, quality materials "equal or superior" to those used in the previous buildings, i.e. Anderson or Marvin windows, upgraded vinyl siding, etc. Mr. Kinney also said these units would probably be built by a "quality" contractor who has done a lot of building in the northeast metro area. Secretary Ekstrand pointed out that the existing units do not all match. Lap siding, cedar, vinyl, etc. have all been used on the other buildings. Chairperson Ledvina asked how the setback variance request related to possible encroaching into the easement. Mr. Kinney replied that, with the NSP high voltage line in the back of the property and the size of the units, they thought it would be most logical to line these buildings up with the existing units. Secretary Ekstrand said he researched the prior units and they were required to comply with the 15-foot setback ordinance. For some reason, they did not and the error was not caught. Mr. Ekstrand thought it was more important "to go with consistency" and, therefore, recommended approval of this variance to keep the units in line. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 01-18-00 -2- Mr. Kinney said a variegated brown/black, upgraded, asphalt shingle with a 3-dimensional look would be used. Mr. Ekstrand confirmed that there was adequate parking. Chairperson Ledvina wasn't sure that it "made the most sense" to continue the setback variance, especially on a busy street such as Woodlynn. He suggested "stair-stepping" the units back--perhaps putting the first unit back three to four feet and the next one at the proper setback. After observing the difference in setback on the existing units, he thought it was rather "a nice variance." Chairperson Ledvina also thought the front facade of these townhomes could be "dressed up in some way," perhaps with a dormer, to add architectural interest. He referred to the turret- design and bay window on the townhomes to the east. Mr. Kinney said the plan is to build these units in three stages and the color has not been decided upon. Boardmember Shankar indicated that whether the buildings were going to be the same color might affect his view on the setback issue. Mr. Kinney did not see any reason why the buildings would not all be the same color. Mr. Shankar thought, if all the units were the same color, it would help to separate the developments by pushing the new buildings back eight feet to the north. Mr. Shankar thought it was best to move all the buildings in this group back because the lots "are not that huge." Mr. Kinney asked to make a comment. He noted that the units further to the east on McKnight Road are set back more but they tend to be more lineal. They are two-stow units with living space over the garage. The new units have the garage more to the front of the street. Mr. Shankar said that since the garage is so prominent in front, pushing the units back would "downplay" the garage. Secretary Ekstrand pointed out that the stairways from the decks on the back extend straight out to the north. If the units were set back, these stairways would go inside the NSP easement. According to Mr. Ekstrand, this should technically not Occur. Mr. Ekstrand spoke about the bay area bump-outs on the adjacent units. He said the problem with the proposed three-plexes is that they have to be twenty feet apart between buildings. This could be an encroachment problem. Mr. Ledvina said he was not specifically suggesting that bump-outs be added. He was using the bay window as an example of a nice architectural detail that could be used. Secretary Ekstrand said it is seven or eight feet to the easement line from the back of the buildings as they are now proposed. Mr. Ledvina suggested that the steps on the back could run from east to west. It was also mentioned that a small landing with the stairs running along the wall of the house might work. Mr. Ekstrand suggested no stairs on the back of the deck or obtaining written permission from NSP to encroach into the easement. Mr. Shankar could easily see the steps being worked into the covered portion of the deck without having to protrude out by "going on the side." According to Mr. Ekstrand, the city engineer indicated there were no drainage issues with this proposal. It is a standard condition to ask the applicant for provide a drainage plan for city approval. Boardmember Shankar said he was having difficulty understanding the number of steps shown in the elevation and in the plan. Mr. Ekstrand thought the grade issues could be fine- tuned with the city engineer and building official's review of the plans. Mr. Shankar was of the opinion that the back steps should be worked into the deck and the units moved back to the easement line. Another boardmember agreed with Mr. Shankar. Mr. Ledvina said the accent trim on the garages was "a step in the right direction" but the garages were really significant. Mr. Shankar felt that staff should have an opportunity to review the color of these units before approval, especially since there are a variety of colors on the existing buildings. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 01-18-00 -3- Mr. Kinney requested that if the variance was not going to be approved, since part of the recommendation was to approve a variance subject to the applicant revising the landscape plan, the landscape plan be lessened to basically meet the city code but not necessarily be as aggressive as that to the east. Mr. Ekstrand said he would still make the same recommendation for additional landscaping because the existing six buildings have essentially the same landscaping scheme. He would not care to see less on these proposed buildings. Boardmember Shankar moved the Community Design Review Board recommend · Co Denial of a resolution that would approve a seven-foot front setback variance for Woodlynn Heights Townhomes Number 7. Approval of the plans date-stamped December 3, 1999 for Woodlynn Heights No. 7 Townhomes, based on the findings required by the code. The developer, Patrick Kinney, shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. Before getting a building permit the applicant shall: a. Submit a grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan to the city engineer for approval. b. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval which incorporates the following details: (1) Seven spruce trees, two clumps of birch trees and six Iow-growing shrubs in the front yards on each side of the entrance driveways for each three-plex. (2) The spruce trees must be at least six feet tall and the birch at least 2 ½ inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. (3) The plantings proposed around the front of the units shown on the landscape plan date-stamped December 3, 1999 shall remain on the plan. (4) In addition to the above, all front side and rear yard areas shall be sodded (except for mulched and edged planting beds and the area within the NSP easement) and an in-ground lawn irrigation system shall be installed for all landscape areas (code requirement). (5) No landscaping shall take place in the boulevard and the boulevard shall be restored with sod. c. Stake the NSP easement line and the front and side lot lines with survey irons. d. Revise the site plan to increase the driveway turnaround setback from the east lot line to five feet (code requirement). e. Present a color scheme for each building to staff for approval. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. Community Design Review Board Minutes of 01-18-00 -4- b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Sod all landscaped areas except for the area within the NSP easement which may be seeded. c. Install an automatic in-ground irrigation system. d. Extension of the five-foot-wide concrete sidewalk to the west lot line of this development. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. bo 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. 5. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Boardmember LaCasse seconded. Chairperson Ledvina said, as the discussion related to denial of the variance, the potential design issues related to the buildings not aligning were not sufficient to offset the negative aspects of the reduced setback of those buildings. Ayes--all The motion passed. B. 1999 Annual Report Secretary Tom Ekstrand presented the staff report. Chairperson Ledvina asked if there were any issues that the board wanted to address. He was satisfied with the report as submitted. Mr. Ekstrand thought there would be a good opportunity to consider new issues once the report is in from the consultant regarding the moratorium on development in the Maplewood Mall area. He felt there might be some specific design issues related to this and also the White Bear Avenue corridor study. Mr. Ekstrand also suggested tabling this annual report until after the White Bear Avenue discussion at the January 19, 2000, planning commission meeting. It was the consensus of the board that this item be continued until the next meeting to see what issues evolve from the White Bear Avenue study presentation at the planning commission meeting. C. Election of Chair and Vice Chair Chairperson Matt Ledvina presented the staff report. Boardmember Shankar nominated Mr. Ledvina as chair. Mr. Shankar asked to be removed from the vice-chair position because of Community Design Review Board Minutes of 01-18-00 VII. IX. -5- other committments. Mr. Ledvina accepted the nomination. Boardmember Ledvina nominated Mr. Johnson as vice-chair. Mr. Johnson accepted. Chairperson Ledvina moved that Matt Ledvina continue as chairperson of the Community Design Review Board with Tim Johnson as the vice-chair. Boardmember Jorgenson seconded. The motion passed. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. BOARD PRESENTATIONS There were no board presentations. STAFF PRESENTATIONS A. B. C. Ayes--all CDRB Volunteer Needed for February 14 City Council Meeting: Mr. Ledvina will attend. Reminder: January 25 meeting is canceled. January 19 Planning Commission Meeting: White Bear Avenue Corridor Study Secretary Tom Ekstrand said a consulting team has been put together to do a study on the White Bear Avenue corridor. Bob Close of Close Landscape Architecture, the team leader, is trying to devise a beautification scheme for White Bear Avenue. Mr. Ekstrand invited the board members to the meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:06 p.m.