HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/27/2001AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
November 27, 2001
6:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers, Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road B East
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes: October 23, 2001
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Unfinished Business
Design Review
a. Specialty Engineering Addition - 1766 Highway 36
b. McCarron's Water Treatment Plant Addition - 1900 Rice Street
7. Visitor Presentations
8. Board Presentations
9. Staff Presentations
a. CDRB representatives needed for December 10 and 17 council meetings.
b. Cancellation of the December 25 CDRB meeting.
c. Mall Area Traffic Study presentation by the consultant on December 17.
d. CDRB memberships ending for CDRB Members Shankar and Jorgenson.
e. Status of filling CDRB vacancy.
10. Adjourn
p:com-dvpt~cdrb.agd
II.
III.
IV.
V=
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Matt Ledvina Present
Craig Jorgenson Present
Linda Olson Present
Ananth Shankar Present
Staff Present:
Shann Finwall
Associate Planner
Recording Secretary: Lisa Kroll
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of the Community Design Review Board minutes for October 23, 2001.
Board Member Jorgenson moved approval of the minutes for October 23, 2001.
Board Member Shankar seconded.
The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Board Member Olson moved approval of the agenda.
Board Member Jorgenson seconded.
The motion passed.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Ayes--Jorgenson, Ledvina,
Olson, Shankar
Ayes -Jo~enson, Ledvina
Olson, Shankar
None.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
2
VI. DESIGN REVIEW
Specialty Engineering Addition
1766 East Highway 36
On May 9, 2001, Specialty Engineering lost 16,300 square feet of warehouse space due to a
fire. The remaining portion of the building is constructed of two types of materials including
painted concrete block on the exterior of the warehouse space and face brick on the exterior
of the office space. The proposed 17,472 square foot addition will be constructed in the
same location as the lost warehouse space and will be approximately one foot taller than the
existing building. The addition includes an enclosed loading dock with access on the east
wall. The exterior materials for the addition include tip up concrete panels that are
impregnated with a light brown color. The panels will have an aggregate finish with a
decorative smooth band. In addition, five windows and a glass entry door will be added to
the south side of the building, and four windows will be added to the east side of the building.
Specialty Engineering's existing parking lot has no curb and gutter, no striped parking stalls,
and does not meet setback requirements. The parking lot also falls under the legal
nonconforming ordinance and does not require improvements with the proposed building
addition. However, Specialty Engineering is proposing to cut away asphalt to comply with
required setbacks, resurface the lot, add concrete curb and gutter, and stripe 24 parking
stalls. There is also room for approximately 10 parking stalls to be striped on the front of the
parking lot, adjacent Cope Avenue, bringing the total number of parking stalls to 34.
In addition, a future parking lot is proposed on the north side of the lot, adjacent Highway 36.
This parking lot would have an additional 49 parking stalls, but is only proposed to show the
possibility of additional parking. It would not be built unless Specialty Engineering, or a
future owner or tenant, requires additional parking.
There is an existing shared parking lot access point in between Specialty Engineering and
Strauss Skate to the west. Specialty Engineering has expressed concerns with the shared
access including Strauss' customers occasionally test riding bicycles, driving through, and
parking in Specialty Engineering's lot. Specialty Engineering is concerned about the safety
of the bicycle test riders and points out that the added traffic hinders the flow of traffic in their
parking lot, particularly in the afternoon when their employees are leaving the site. For this
reason, Specialty Engineering is proposing to close off the access.
The city's fire chief, Steve Lukin, requested that the shared access remain for fire safety
reasons. Chief Lukin pointed out that during Specialty Engineering's fire last spring the
shared access allowed the city's large fire vehicles to maneuver around the site more
efficiently and quickly.
Currently there is no clear delineation between the two parking lots. This is a possible cause
for many of Strauss' customers utilizing Specialty engineering's parking lot. With the parking
lot improvements a 20-foot long curbed island is proposed between the two parking lots,
which will clearly delineate the two lots and reduce the access width from 55 feet to 24 feet.
The reduced access width will help alleviate some of Specialty Engineering's concerns, and
will address the fire chief's fire access concerns. Therefore, staff recommends that the
shared access remain with a reduced width of 24 feet.
Community Design Review Board 3
Minutes 11-27-2001
Specialty Engineering proposes to put six crab apple trees along Cope Avenue and
foundation plantings to be located along the front of the building.
Specialty Engineering has two existing parking lot lights located on telephone poles along
Cope Avenue. In addition to these lights, they propose five wall pack lights to be located on
the south and east side of the addition.
There are three existing rooftop mechanical units and two new units proposed with the
addition. Specialty Engineering proposes to paint all rooftop equipment to match the
building.
Specialty Engineering's dumpster is currently stored on the east side of their parking lot,
adjacent McDonald's fence. With the addition they propose to construct a dumpster
enclosure made of cedar fencing that will be located adjacent the east and north walls of the
existing warehouse and office space.
Board Member Olson asked staff if the area to the north of the building between the
warehouse and Highway 36 would remain as grass?
Ms. Finwall said yes it would remain as a grass area.
Board Member Shankar asked if the reason staff is requesting the additional ten parking
stalls is that Specialty Engineering does not meet the parking code for their facility currently?
Ms. Finwall said that is correct, but as pointed out in the staff report the parking lot situation
is grandfathered. Also, Specialty Engineering is making the parking lot more conforming with
the additional striped stalls.
Chairperson Ledvina asked staff who owns the fence on the east property line?
Ms. Finwall said McDonald's owns the fence on the east property line.
Chairperson Ledvina asked staff if there is a lighting plan that is required for this proposal
with proximity to residential area?
Ms. Finwall said lighting on the site is also grandfathered in. In addition, Specialty
Engineering is not adjacent residential property, but is approximately 330 feet from
residential property south on Lark Avenue. The lighting proposed is additional wall pack
lights to be located on the south and east side of the building. There are two existing pole
lights that light the parking lot located on Cope Avenue.
Chairperson Ledvina asked staff if there is a maximum impervious surface requirement for
this site?
Ms. Finwall said no there is not.
The applicant Dave Myhr from Specialty Engineering addressed the board members.
Mr. Myhr told staff that Specialty Engineering is trying to replace what was lost in the fire and
try and improve the ground so that the property would look aesthetically more pleasing from
Cope Avenue. The improvements would bring the property in compliance with many codes.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
Specialty Engineering had a taller structure before the fire and now they are proposing a
shorter structure (the new addition will be one-foot taller than the existing building-where the
previous structure was at least 2 feet taller). There used to be a block building that was built
in the sixties and they are proposing a more modern construction with the tilt up panels with
exposed aggregate.
Mr. Myhr said they have already painted the remaining building so it would match the new
construction. The concern that Specialty Engineering had with the recommendations of staff
is the issue of safety. They feel there is a safety issue with the cross traffic between their
parking lot and Strauss Skate. It seems to be easier for customers to go from the parking lot
of Strauss Skate across Specialty Engineering's lot and exit onto Cope Avenue. It creates a
safety issue because of the speed the customers have in the parking lot. The semi trucks
enter and exit the parking lot of Specialty Engineering and as they come from the east side of
the building, where the truck ramp is located, the visibility is limited. This is one of the
reasons Specialty Engineering wants to put in the curbing between the two parking lots.
Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Myhr regarding the access issue for Strauss Skate, have you
discussed this with your neighbor?
Mr. Myhr states that if it remains open it will be no different than having cars parked along
half of the 55-foot opening. An average car is 18 feet long and it is going to take up half of
that space. The other half of the parking lot remains open for traffic. If they cut the parking
lot down to 24 feet it really doesn't change the access or the viability of people to use that as
an access.
Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Myhr if there would be any grass that would be restored in
that area if the curb were added?
Mr. Myhr said Specialty Engineering proposed to set the parking curb 10 feet from the
property line rather than 5 feet in an effort to match the line of the building and then restore
that 10-foot strip with grass. It was also proposed to put trees and or plantings on that strip
of grass. Then it was discussed that it may be better to just have grass in that area so that
emergency vehicles could drive over the curb.
Chairperson Ledvina pointed out that the site plan shows a bump in the curb along west
parking lot boundary for a vehicle turn-around in that area.
Mr. Myhr said the landscape plan shows it straight without the bump in. The plan was to run
the curbing straight and leave a 1 O-foot strip of grass.
Board Member Olson said she would have to agree with the fire marshal that having two
entrances and exits to the parking lot would be an asset. She thinks that with the curb and
gutter extended it would have a psychological deterrent as far as traffic between Strauss
Skate and Specialty Engineering. She also asked if there was a reason they reduced the
height of the building one foot in the new construction, was it a structural concern?
Mr. Myhr said it is not a structural concern but do require a high bay facility. One of the
concerns of staff was that the south side of the building was exposed to the residential
neighborhood and it would be better to have a lower structure so it would not be such an
imposing building. The original plan was to have a two-story structure built.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
Board Member Olson asked Mr. Myhr if that effects Specialty Engineering's operations at all?
Mr. Myhr said they would work around that. The high bay is nice because welding will be
done in that area which creates a lot of smoke. With the higher ceilings they can add some
additional smoke collection to try and mitigate any smoke that might occur in the interior.
Board Member Shankar asked Mr. Myhr for clarification. The new addition is actually taller
than the existing warehouse?
Mr. Myhr said it is taller by one foot.
Board Member Shankar asked Mr. Myhr where the semi trucks come from?
Mr. Myhr said the semi's come from Cope Avenue and they travel along the east side of the
building, they pull up parallel to the existing side of the warehouse back into the enclosed
truck bay and the new addition.
Board Member Shankar asked if there is enough radius to do all that maneuvering to get the
semi trucks back into the dock?
Mr. Myhr said Specialty Engineering had no problem with it before the fire so it is their intent
to keep doing it that way again.
Board Member Shankar asked if there is a reason that the small office addition is protruding
to the east from the warehouse?
Mr. Myhr said the existing office has been there since the sixties and it is the structure that
was remaining from the fire.
Board Member Shankar asked if Mr. Myhr is proposing the dumpster to be put behind the
office addition so it is hidden from Highway 36?
Mr. Myhr said there is a modified dumpster plan, the one on the print is not accurate. Mr.
Myhr walked around to each member and showed the modified plan for the dumpster
enclosure which include a larger fenced in enclosure located on the east side of the addition.
Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Myhr if the dumpster enclosure is made of cedar?
Mr. Myhr said correct.
Board Member Olson asked Mr. Myhr about the comment made earlier about Maple trees?
Mr. Myhr said they are going to plant some lower trees for underneath the power lines and
they will plant whatever tree staff recommends.
Ms. Finwall clarified, that originally Mr. Myhr had suggested planting 6 Amur Maples that are
a lower growing tree/shrub. Staff pointed out to Mr. Myhr, that type of tree is beginning to be
quite invasive and not very environmentally friendly. Staff suggested replacing them with
crab apple trees.
Board Member Olson asked staff if all of the trees would be one species?
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
Ms. Finwall said that is what is being proposed.
Chairperson Ledvina said the staff report focuses on the parking on the south side of the
proposed addition and apparently it is not possible to fit in two rows of parking, is that
correct?
Mr. Myhr said yes there is room, it is just not shown as being striped, there is a modified plan
that shows striping. The plan that was just submitted shows 51 parking spaces striped on
the curbed paved area. They just did not show all of the parking spaces being striped on the
plan that was submitted, but that can certainly be done in the spring. Three of the parking
stalls will be handicapped accessible, one will be on the north end and two of them will be
back by the south end.
Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Myhr in terms of the building elevations, are there two bands
of striping on the proposed addition?
Mr. Myhr said there are two smooth bands, one is above the window line and the other is two
feet below the crown.
Chairperson Ledvina asked what color the striping would be?
Mr. Myhr said the striping will be the same color as the building. There are vertical ribs
running in it and the smooth bands break up the vertical ribs to give it some depth or contour.
Chairperson Ledvina asked if the bands have exposed aggregate also?
Mr. Myhr said it will be the same color as the sample of block he brought with him to show
members and it will be smooth.
Chairperson Ledvina said one of the things he is concerned about is the south elevation. He
is concerned about the area between the west end of the building and the window to the
east. There is quite a large expanse of wall that is 100 plus feet. Did you look at dressing
that wall up at all?
Mr. Myhr said all they looked at was putting some bushes in that area that would grow six-to-
eight feet to break that area up. The previous building had a garage door and a service
entrance and it was a taller building with cinder blocks. They think what they are proposing
to build in that area will look far better than what was there before.
Chairperson Ledvina said he appreciates the effort Specialty Engineering has put into the
design of the building, however, since the slate is wiped clean, this is a good time to think
about adding architectural elements to break up that part of the building. Is there a possibility
of adding elements to break up that expanse?
Mr. Myhr said there is nothing left in the budget to add architectural details. They have used
up the money from the insurance claim just to get this structure up the way it has been
presented.
Board Member Shankar asked Mr. Myhr why they need the windows clustered together in
that one corner?
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
7
Mr. Myhr said, if they are unable to regrow their business back to move into that area, it
would be their intent to lease out that space. The windows are grouped together so there is
room for a possible addition in the event they do lease space. At that point and time they
may have to take a look at putting parking for themselves on the north side of the building.
Board Member Olson said she noticed on the landscape plans they have dogwood, nine
bark, burning bush or equal drawn out on the plans. She is not that familiar with the tree
species, what is the height of a dogwood?
Mr. Myhr said it is a six-to-eight foot bush.
Board Member Olson asked if the height of the vegetation will exceed the height of the
windows?
Mr. Myhr said no because they do not have the dogwood specified in front of the window
area, that will have Iow growth vegetation like spirea. They are just calling out the taller
vegetation on the areas without the windows.
Board Member Shankar asked Mr. Myhr, there are two smooth bands on the elevation, the
one in the middle is a narrower band and the one on the top is a wider band, is that correct?
Mr. Myhr said the architect's believe the width of the two bands are the same width,
regardless of how it is depicted on the elevation. The intent was to have the bands the same
width.
Board Member Shankar said his preference is to have the wider band to the top and the
narrower band in the middle.
Mr. Myhr said he would check into that for staff.
Board Member Jorgenson asked Mr. Myhr, can you describe the wall pack lights?
Scott Amundson with M.A. Mortenson Construction described the lights as being a total of
five wall pack units that are proposed. The intent is to illuminate the area directly adjacent to
the building and to provide some illumination out into the adjacent parking stalls. The intent
is to illuminate down and away from the edge of the building and out into the parking lot. He
is not sure of the actual radius that will be provided by the particular light pack, but the intent
was to have five exterior wall pack lights.
The packs come with a directional lamp, you can turn it straight out, but the intent is to
illuminate the area directly adjacent the building and have some spillover into the adjacent
parking area.
Board Member Jorgenson asked, so the proposed light plan is for five wall pack lights
instead of the two that is in the staff report? There will be three lights on the south and two
lights on the east side?
Mr. Amundson said that is correct.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
Board Member Shankar asked Mr. Amundson if the plan is showing some metal plans above
the dock doors, is that correct?
Mr. Amundson said yes it is. It is an exterior mounted coiling metal door and the shroud on
the enclosure isn't large enough to carry it all the way up to the top of the parapet, so they
are providing a texture coat metal panel to seal that off and match the color of the precast
panels.
Board Member Shankar asked how tall the metal panels are?
Mr. Amundson said anywhere from one foot to eighteen inches of it would be exposed above
the cooling door mechanism.
Board Member Shankar pointed out that the drawing is not accurate because it shows a four-
foot metal panel.
Mr. Amundson said the drawing was intended to depict the existence of a metal panel to
provide a closure or counter flashing above the coiling door mechanism. The scale of the
panel will be dictated by the height of the shroud on the metal panel.
Board Member Olson asked if the window frames will be done in brown?
Mr. Amundson said the window frames will be done in the brown anodized aluminum frame
as is the storefront.
Board Member Shankar asked if the window frames will be done in clear brown anodized
aluminum or dark brown anodized?
Mr. Amundson said the intent is to have dark brown anodized to aesthetically match the rest
of the building color schemes.
Board Member Olson asked if there is any other color being introduced or is it all going to be
shades of beige and brown?
Mr. Amundson said, it will all be beige and brown to match the existing warehouse.
Chairperson Ledvina discussed the requirement for Specialty Engineering to reconstruct
within one year of the tire. For clarification he would like to change the condition on page 3
number 1 of the staff report. Ms. Finwall said Specialty Engineering would require a
conditional use permit for construction of a building within 350 feet of residential property if
they do not begin construction by one year of the date of the fire. Therefore it would be okay
to clarify the condition.
Chairperson Ledvina would like to clarify the condition on page 3 of the staff report item
number 1. to read:
Repeat this review if the city has not issued a building permit for the project within one year
of the fire.
Mr. Myhr said that would be fine with Specialty Engineering.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
9
Chairperson Ledvina asked staff, regarding the north parking area, is there a condition in the
staff report that says the north parking area is not approved at this time, or can we add it as a
condition?
Ms. Finwall said to answer Board Member Shankar's question earlier, the parking for
Specialty Engineering requires 46 parking stalls with the addition. Originally they proposed
to have 24 stalls and staff recommended an additional 10 stalls. The revised parking layout
is proposed for 51 parking stalls depending on how it is laid out without the use of the north
parking area. Therefore, they meet the parking requirements. However, it is not required as
their existing lot is grandfathered in. The north parking lot is shown as proof of parking and is
not proposed at this time.
Chairperson Ledvina said to staff, that since this a new plan, we could say the parking plan is
subject to staff approval.
Ms. Finwall said that 2. a. (1) could be revised to read, a revised plan should be submitted to
staff for approval.
Chairperson Ledvina said he would like to add a sixth condition stating that the north parking
lot was not approved at this time.
Ms. Finwall said that would be fine.
Board Member Shankar asked if he heard the new color of the metal panels would match the
existing building color?
Chairperson Ledvina said correct.
Board Member Shankar asked if that could be added as item 2. d.?
Ms. Finwall asked Board Member Shankar to repeat that?
Board Member Shankar said the color of the new pre cast panels in the addition, shall match
the color of the masonry walls of the existing warehouse.
Ms. Finwall said thank you.
Chairperson Ledvina said as far as the parking lot is concerned and the access to the
parking lot for Specialty Engineering and Strauss Skate, it is his opinion that restoring a 10-
foot strip of grass is preferable. He thinks that a sodded area is fine and emergency vehicles
could drive over that area very easily. Maplewood has hundreds of properties with one
access to the parking lot. He feels that the applicant's request to close that access to the
west is acceptable.
Board Member Jorgenson said he agrees with Chairperson Ledvina. Getting rid of the tree
and leaving it a green space with sod will break things up. He understands the safety issue
of the parking lot and sees the heavy business and traffic through the parking lots as a safety
hazard. He would concur with the applicant, that this is a safety issue and Specialty
Engineering is doing what is best for themselves and everybody involved. He was in the
area last spring when the fire occurred and saw the emergency vehicles maneuvering
around the site.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
l0
Board Member Olson said it would not be necessary to install the curbed island.
Board Member Shankar said if you were having some parking there that curbed island
provides a breakage point.
Chairperson Ledvina asked Board Member Olson in her opinion how did she feel about the
driveway access issue?
Board Member Olson said she agreed that the 10-foot strip of sod would be fine and she is
comfortable having emergency vehicles driving onto the grassed area.
Chairperson Ledvina asked staff if 2. a. (2) could be eliminated regarding the driveway
access?
Ms. Finwall said the landscape plan would have to be slightly revised. So, perhaps Specialty
Engineering should submit a revised landscape plan that should be added as 2. e.
Chairperson Ledvina said maybe 2. a. (2) could be changed to indicate that.
Board Member Shankar said maybe it could say, the revised landscape plan shall be
submitted for staff approval.
Board Member Jorgenson asked if the landscape plan should still say 6 crab apple trees?
Chairperson Ledvina said he thinks that could be worked out with staff.
Board Member Shankar said he would like to see the south elevation dressed up more as
Chairperson Ledvina had mentioned. But in lieu of what the applicant said that the panels
have already been fabricated, there is not much the board can do about that.
Board Member Jorgenson said he feels it will be a very handsome addition to the area.
Chairperson Ledvina said overall it is a pretty good proposal. He welcomes the site
improvements that are going to be made to this project. He would have liked to see a bit
more in regards to the south elevation with some more architectural detailing but we
recognize the budget situation. It concerned him that the applicant already directed the
manufacturer to set molds etc. The applicant should not do anything without the board
reviewing and approving it first.
Mr. Scott Amundson of M.A. Mortenson Construction said, Fabcon is the pre cast panel
supplier and installer and they have given them notice to proceed with the shop drawings. At
this point M.A. Mortenson Construction has not reviewed the drawings, so if there was an
intent to change the smooth bands to reflect the wide at the top and the narrow at the
bottom, it can be addressed still.
Board Member Shankar would like to add condition 2. e. to reflect that. Saying that both the
smooth bandwidths shall be equal in height or that the top band shall match the height of the
metal panels.
Community Design Review Board ! !
Minutes 11-27-2001
Chairperson Ledvina asked staff if this motion represents an approval and it does not go to
City Council, is that correct?
Ms. Finwall stated that is correct.
Board Member Jorgenson moved to approve the proposed site plan, building elevations, and
landscape plan date stamped November 2, 2001, for Specialty Engineering at 1766 East
Highway 36. This approval shall be subject to the following conditions:
Repeat this review if the city has not issued a building permit for the project within
one year of the fire.
2. Complete the following before the city issues a building permit:
a. Submit plans to staff for approval that incorporates the following details:
(1) A revised parking plan.
(2) A revised landscape plan.
b. Design and location of an exterior dumpster enclosure. If no dumpster
enclosure is constructed, all dumpsters must be stored indoors.
c. Present a sample of the exterior building materials to staff for approval.
d. Color of precast panels shall match existing warehouse color.
e. Both smooth bands shall be equal in width or the top smooth band shall match
the height of the metal panels on the east elevation.
3. Complete the following before occupying each building:
a. Complete all landscaping for the site.
b. In-ground sprinkler for all landscaped areas. If the installation of a sprinkler
system is not feasible because of existing pavement, the applicant must
submit written agreement to hand water all landscaping.
c. Restore and sod damaged boulevards.
d. Install a stop sign at the driveway exit.
e. Paint all rooftop mechanical equipment to match building.
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.
b. The city receives cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required
work. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the unfinished work.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
12
Any unfinished landscaping shall be completed by June I 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.
All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development
may approve minor changes.
6. The north parking area in this plan is not approved at this time.
Board Member Olson seconded the motion.
Ayes - Jorgenson, Ledvina,
Olson, Shankar
The motion passed.
McCarron's Water Treatment Plant Addition
1900 Rice Street
Ms. Finwall said the Saint Paul Regional Water Service is proposing an addition to the
McCarron's campus at 1900 Rice Street. This addition requires design review as well as a
conditional use permit revision for the expansion of a public building. The Planning
Commission did review the conditional use permit aspect of the application on November 19,
2001, in which they recommended approval of this project.
The Saint Paul Regional Water Services is proposing to make the following changes to their
original plant building:
Build a 250-square-foot entrance vestibule. This vestibule would be above a below-
grade maintenance shop also proposed in the applicant's planned improvements.
This vestibule would be on the west side of the building.
Add a new fac,,ade on the west elevation. The primary material would be stucco.
Refer to the elevations.
3. Provide four handicap-parking spaces in an existing parking lot.
4. Add landscaping to the site, primarily along the west side of the main building.
The applicant is requesting:
Approval of a conditional use permit revision for the proposed addition and changes
to the facility. City code requires a conditional use permit for public utilities, public
services or public buildings in the city. This request is to revise an existing conditional
use permit since the council previously approved a conditional use permit for the
applicant. The proposed changes would be revisions to the site plan covered by the
conditional use permit.
2. Approval of project plans.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
]3
The project scope is for improvements to employee, maintenance, and administrative and
public education areas in the original plant building on the McCarron's Water Treatment Plant
campus.
There are two additions to the building's west side exterior: The largest is a below grade
3,921 square foot maintenance shop addition. Only the new loading dock is and exposed
surface replacing the original. The second addition is a 250 square foot entrance vestibule
located on top of the maintenance addition. This has been designed in the original
architectural character/features of the Plant building.
The interior renovation work is for the public education, administrative and employee service
areas. These are located in abandoned chemical feed areas of the Plant found in the old
Train Bay and Head House (Tower 1).
Board Member Olson asked staff if the dark rectangular area on the map, was the solids
collection area?
Ms. Finwall said perhaps the applicant can answer that.
Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board.
The applicant David Wagner addressed the board. He is with the Saint Paul Regional Water
Services, he is the Engineering Manager with the Utility, and the Project Manager on this
project.
Board Member Olson said the reason for her question is that she was able to take the tour
last spring at the facility during their open house. She was very impressed with the way the
solid system worked and was confused about the actual location of this.
Mr. Wagner said the area in question used to house chlorine and some other chemicals and
there used to be some railroad tracks there. The proposed plan is to convert that area into
three levels of remodeled space. This will be lunchrooms, locker rooms, and additional office
space etc.
Board Member Olson asked Mr. Wagner why the entrance to the facility on Rice Street is
blocked, is that a security issue?
Mr. Wagner said that is a temporary security issue. They are looking at a more permanent
closing of that entrance to the public.
Board Member Olson said she thinks the architect did an excellent job with the architectural
renderings and compatibility with the existing structure, and she is very pleased to see the
retre-style thirties style coming out in the design details.
Chairperson Ledvina said he would agree with Board Member Olson.
Board Member Jorgenson said he would concur with the othere.
Board Member Jorgenson moved to appreve the plans (date-stamped November 2, 2001 ) for
the proposed expansion and renovation of the St. Paul Regional Water Services McCarron's
Water Treatment Plant at 1900 Rice Street North. The city bases this approval on findings
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
]4
required by the code. The property owner shall do the following:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a permit for this project.
2. Revise the site plan for staff approval showing handicap parking spaces that meet
ADA requirements before obtaining a building permit.
Provide a detailed grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan to the city
engineer for approval before obtaining a building permit.
If any required work shown on the approved plans is not done by the time of a final
inspection for this project, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or
welfare.
The city receives cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required
work. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the unfinished work.
The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished
work.
5. All work shall follow the approved plans.
approve minor changes.
Board Member Olson seconded the motion.
The motion is passed.
The director of community development may
Ayes -Jorgenson, Ledvina,
Olson, Shankar
VII. Visitor Presentations
No visitors present.
VIII.
Board Presentations
Mr. Ledvina was the representative for the CDRB at the November 13, 2001 City
Council meeting. Items that were passed were The Productive Day Golf Course that
was ayes - all. The other was the Hill Murray School addition that was ayes - all.
IX.
Staff Presentations
a. Mr. Shankar will represent the CDRB at the December 10, 2001, City Council
meeting.
b. Mr. Jorgenson will represent the CDRB at the December 17, 2001, City Council
meeting at 5:00 p.m.
c. There will be a Mall Area Traffic Study presentation by the consultant on December
17, 2001, at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. Everyone on the board is invited to attend this
meeting. Following that will be the regular Planning Commission Meeting at 7:00
p.m.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2001
do
Just a reminder that thers will not be a CDRB meeting December 25, 2001, because
of the holiday.
so
Community Design Review Board Members Mr. Shankar and Mr. Jorgenson have
decided to continue as members on the board for another two years.
fo
The status of filling the Community Design Review Board vacancy is that Mr.
Ekstrand would like to wait until the City Council decides on the Planning Commission
member's vacancies. The Community Design Review Board has received two
applications. The Planning Commission has received four or five applications. Once
the council decides on a new Planning Commission member, the applicants who did
not get chosen may then apply for the Community Design Review Board, allowing a
more diverse group to chose from. It may be as soon as January that the board at
applicants.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m.