Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/10/2006 AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD January 10, 2006 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers. Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. RollCall 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: December 13, 2005 5. Unfinished Business: None Scheduled 6. Design Review: a. Savers - Birch Run Station, 1741 Beam Avenue b. Gladstone Redevelopment Concept Plan (Joint Presentation for the Community Design Review Board and Housing and Redevelopment Authority at 7 p.m.) 7. Visitor Presentations: 8. Board Presentations: 9. Staff Presentations: a. Resolution of Appreciation for Diana Longrie b. Sign Code - Final Recommendation 10. Adjoum MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JANUARY 10, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Board member John Hinzman Board member Matt Ledvina Vice-chairperson Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Absent Present Present Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner Kevin Christianson, Planning (present until 7:00) Staff Absent: Lisa Kroll. Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Ledvina moved to approve the agenda. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes -Ledvina, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for December 13, 2005. Board member Shankar moved approval of the minutes of December 13, 2005. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes ---Olson, Shankar Abstentions - Ledvina The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Savers - Birch Run Station -1741 Beam Avenue Ms. Finwall said the used-merchandise store, Savers, will be opening at Birch Run Station. Part of their operation is to provide a drop-off center for products to be sold in the store. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 2 The applicant, Stephen Ovian, owner of Birch Run Station, is requesting approval from the community design review board (CDRB) for a proposed drop-off center in the parking lot. This new Savers store would be located in the space originally used by Kids R Us and most recently by a furniture store. Normally, a minor design review such as this would be handled administratively. Staff, however, wanted to forward this proposal to the CDRB because of our concern over the potential for materials accumulating around the drop-off center after hours. This proposal, though in compliance with the zoning criteria of the BC (business commercial) district, has potential for unsightliness due to materials left there at night. Staff would like to be clear that we don't oppose Savers' operation in any way. We simply want to take precautions to ensure that any merchandise dropped after hours, is promptly removed or moved inside the next day. The applicant is aware of staffs concern and proposes to have the proposed drop-off center inspected each morning to ensure a neat operation. Staff said the applicant provided some revised plans this evening that staff has not had the opportunity to review yet. Chairperson Olson asked if there would be any trash compactors located near this building? This is a big issue at the Goodwill drop-off site on White Bear Avenue. Goodwill has put in larger and larger trash collection devices and she is concerned the Savers facility will require that type of equipment as well. Ms. Finwall said that's a good question and perhaps the applicant can address that issue when they have the opportunity to speak. However, the applicant indicated in their letter that the donated items would be brought in twice a day so staff did not believe they propose any type of dumpster at the drop off site. The dumpsters for the retail center are currently located behind the stores. Chairperson Olson said she is concerned that this drop off site would be located closer to the Gander Mountain store than it would be to the Savers store itself. She asked if staff would be opposed to moving the drop off station closer to the center of the parking lot which would then be closer to the Savers location? Ms. Finwall said staff would not be opposed to that. She displayed the location of the drop off station on the screen. Board member Ledvina said in the staff recommendations, in condition number 1; it states "ensuring daily that no outside merchandise storage or accumulation shall occur". He asked if that meant for 365 days a year? Ms. Finwall said correct. Board member Ledvina said he believed that wording should be stated in the conditions because Savers may not be open on Sundays or on Holidays and materials could accumulate on those days. Chairperson Olson asked the applicant to address the board. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 3 Mr. Thomas Hart, Winthrop & Weinstein, Minneapolis, addressed the board. He said his services have been obtained from the landlord of Birch Run Station and he is here to address any concerns of the board. He said it is as important to the landlord as it is to the city to maintain a clean and trash free location. As the owner of the property the last thing they want is to have trash accumulating in the public space or common area that would create significant problems for the other tenants and for the customers. They have no opposition to moving the drop off station closer to the Savers location. They also have no opposition to the conditions listed in the staff report. There will be security cameras at this location to discourage people from dropping materials off after hours. Mr. Steve Ovian, RPD Catalyst, LLC, 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 820, Los Angeles, CA, owners of the property at Birch Run Station, addressed the board. They are very concerned about keeping this site clean. Savers will have an obligation under their lease to keep the area clean every day. They hadn't thought of the holidays and how items would be taken care of. As a backup they have a day person at the center every day and Savers will make the commitment to have someone there for an hour on the holidays to police and remove items that are dropped off at the site. Savers takes in these donations and every item is donated to some type of charitable donation or local charity. As an example, if a bag of clothes comes in that generates money for charities such as the Epilepsy Foundation or another charity. There is an incentive for people to donate their items and Savers stores will get the items in the right hands. This is a manned station and the employees will take these items and put them into a golf cart and bring the items into the store a couple times a day. There is no dumpster at this location. The main store will have a dumpster or compactor in the rear of the store. The idea here is the donated items are screened so there isn't really any trash generated. If somebody comes with an item that Savers cannot resell or donate to a foreign country Savers will reject it. If somebody comes with a refrigerator the staff on hand will have a flyer that will show them where they can bring the item, it may cost that person a small fee to get rid of the item but at least it is being donated, recycled or disposed of in the right location. That greatly cuts down the dropping off of inappropriate items. Savers has staff on site at 7:30 a.m. and the first priority is to ensure anything that may have been dropped off at night is properly removed. They have no problem relocating the drop off station so it is closer to the Saver's site. That section of the parking lot is never full. They would prefer to leave as many parking spaces in front of the store available for the customers that want to go into the store. Chairperson Olson said she has shopped at the Savers store off Maryland Avenue so she is familiar with the way Savers stores operate. At the Goodwill store people often try to drop of furniture and they are turned away. When you bring a bag of clothes into Goodwill stores they are usually sorted in bins inside the store. Sometimes the clothes are not in good condition and cannot be sold and are thrown into the dumpster. She asked how Savers would handle situations like these? Mr. David VanBockel, District Manager for Savers, 2124 Lake Street East, Minneapolis, addressed the board. There is no presorting done at this location. People will drop items off at the drop off station and the employees will bring the items into the store. The people that are dropping off large items such as furniture would be directed to drive around the back of the store and they will be helped with those items. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 4 Board member Ledvina had concerns about the design of the building. It appears there are ramps shown on the plan for this building. He understands the need for the handicap accessible ramp but shouldn't the building be built slab on grade to avoid the need for other ramps and railings? Mr. Jeff Agnes, Aarchitects, 1501 Washington Avenue South, Suite 300, Minneapolis, addressed the board. He is the architect for this project. He said there are two ramps. One ramp is by the double door which is for the transporting of goods and the other is for the handicap accessible ramp. The building is off the ground about 12 inches and that is so the building can be secured and tied to the ground. The building has to be off the ground. With a slab on grade building you would have to drop some foundations which is not technically feasible for a building this small and of this nature. It makes more sense for them to have the building 12 inches off the ground and bring the ramp up to it. This is a handicap accessible requirement to have ramps and railings on this building. Board member Ledvina asked if they are concerned about cars driving across the parking lot and running into the drop off station at night? It's a small building. Are there reflective strips on the building? Mr. Agnes said there is quite a bit of signage on the building so that may help. The building is actually within the parking stalls and not within the drive aisle so they are not too concerned about someone driving into the drop off station. Chairperson Olson asked about the lighting on the site. She asked if there would be down lights or 24-hour lights. Mr. Agnes said they are required to have a wall pack light directly above the door. The rest of the building will be illuminated by lighting in the parking lot. Chairperson Olson asked if there would be any pre-lit signs on this building? Mr. VanBockel said this is a prefab building that will come in on the back of a truck and dropped in place. There will be a stucco detail on the building so it will look as part of the center. The brick veneer will be finished off and go all the way to the ground. He stated the drop off sign on the building will be illuminated. Board member Shankar asked if they know where the catch basins for the parking lot are so if they do end up moving the building closer to the Savers building they wouldn't be at a low point in the parking lot? Mr. VanBockel said the parking lot drains in a pretty significant way and he displayed where the high point of the parking lot is. He said the drainage of the parking lot drains towards Beam Avenue. Board member Shankar asked why they need such a large sign? He said you almost see more signage than brick. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 5 Mr. VanBockel said they are still working on the signage. They are only looking for feedback from the board so they can better design the sign based on the city's standards and then bring it back for review and approval. The first couple of signs they displayed on the screen are not related to this building but is the signage they would propose for the main building. They would propose to have individual channel lit letters. They propose to have a temporary banner in the interim before they can install the permanent sign. They would also have a donation center sign with an arrow. These sign details will be brought back to the city to be reviewed at a later date. Board member Shankar asked if the Savers sign would be turned off when they are not open for business? Mr. VanBockel said he assumed the sign would be off but he believes Savers stores normally leave the sign on all the time. Board member Shankar said if the sign is left on people will drop things off in the middle of the night. Mr. VanBockel said he thought the sign should be off when the building is not being manned. The sign details will be worked out with the staff at a later date. Chairperson Olson thanked the applicant and the others for answering the questions of the board and for being present this evening. Board member Ledvina said the applicant has done a nice job matching the drop-off building to surrounding buildings. Staff targeted the main concerns in the conditions listed in the staff report but he feels more conditions could be added. He defers the decision regarding where the drop off station is located in the parking lot to the applicant. Chairperson Olson asked if the property manager could speak regarding the landscaping islands with the trees and bushes that would be used for screening purposes between the Gander Mountain building and Savers as well as how the trees and bushes will be maintained? Mr. VanBockel said there are some small ash trees which are covered with rocks and then the trees and small shrubs in the islands. Chairperson Olson asked if those trees would get substantially larger? Mr. VanBockel said those trees would get 20 to 25 feet in height. The front of the Gander Mountain store is on the north side but they have numerous parking spaces on that side. It isn't a location where there is a lot of traffic. Savers is very comfortable with the location of the drop off station. Chairperson Olson asked if they have any plans to enhance the landscaping on the site or if they plan to maintain what already exists? Mr. VanBockel said they will maintain what already exists. Birch Run Station planted some new trees with the construction of Kennard Street. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 6 Board member Ledvina asked staff about the comprehensive sign plan for the Birch Run Station and he asked if this required an amendment? Ms. Finwall said that is correct Birch Run Station was approved with a comprehensive sign plan with most tenants allowed wall signage at 42 inches high, but the anchor stores are allowed to have larger signage. As long as Savers and the drop off building meet the comprehensive sign plan city staff could approve it. However, the board could request that this come back for an amendment to that plan if need be. Board member Ledvina said he isn't necessarily suggesting that. This is a small brick building and it would be good to minimize the amount of signage if possible. You want to identify the purpose of the building but he doesn't want all the brick covered with sign age. He said he is comfortable having staff approve that. Ms. Finwall said there is a lot of signage on this small building and staff would like to see that scaled back. Board member Shankar said he is concerned about the handicap accessible ramp metal railings and he would like to see the color of the railings match either the roof or the doors. Board member Ledvina moved to approve the plans date-stamped December 19, 2005, for the proposed 10 by 20 foot merchandise drop-off building in the parking lot at the proposed Savers store to be located at 1719A Beam Avenue. Approval is conditioned upon the Savers' management and the property owner: (changes made by the CDRB are underlined if added.) 1. Ensuring daily (365 davs per vear) that there is no outside merchandise storage or accumulation at the proposed drop-off site for Savers. Any outdoor storage on the site would be in violation of the city's zoning code. This includes any materials kept near the store or in the dumpster area behind the store. 2. Siqns presented at the 1-10-06 communitv desiqn review board meetinq are not approved. Staff shall approve building signage as follows: a. The proposed building shall be signed to identify its purpose. There shall also be a sign stating the hours for drop-offs, the type of materials that may be dropped off and a warning that after-hours drop offs are prohibited. b. Siqnaqe on both Saver's retail store and merchandise drop-off buildinq must complv or be consistent with Birch Run Station's comprehensive siqn plan. Q. Anv illuminated siqnaqe on the merchandise drop-off buildinq must be turned off when merchandise donations are not beinq accepted. ~ The handicap accessible ramp metal rails must match the color of the roof or the doors on the merchandise drop-off buildinq. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 7 Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. b. Gladstone Redevelopment Concept Plan (Joint Presentation for the Community Design Review Board and Housing and Redevelopment Authority at 7 p.m.) (After a short recess Chairperson Olson called the joint HRA & CDRB meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.) Ms. Finwall introduced Melinda Coleman, Assistant City Manager and Chuck Ahl, the Public Works Director who will be speaking tonight regarding the Gladstone Redevelopment Area. Ms. Coleman thanked the CDRB members and the HRA commissioners for coming to hear the Gladstone discussion. For the last two years, the city has been conducting an extensive planning process for the possible redevelopment of the Gladstone Neighborhood Area (the area near Frost Avenue and English Street). The process has included the hiring of consultants to prepare and evaluate development and redevelopment plans and alternatives for the area. It also included the formation of a task force of citizens and city commission members to provide input to the city and the planning consultants about the proposed plans. Through this extensive process, the city and the consultants recently completed a draft neighborhood redevelopment plan. The city is now asking all the city boards and commissions to each make a recommendation to the city council about the draft plan. On December 19, 2005, the city held a meeting at the Maplewood Community Center for all city boards and commissions. The planning consultants provided the board and commission members an overview of the planning process and a summary of the draft Gladstone Redevelopment Plan. The consultants and city staff also answered questions about the planning process and the draft plan from those in attendance. Staff would like the CDRB and the HRA to make comments or suggestions regarding this plan. A slideshow was presented and staff asked that this be an open dialogue to receive feedback on the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. Chairperson Olson said as a member of the Gladstone Task Force she has heard many people say "high density means low quality of life" and high density does not necessarily mean low quality of life. People automatically think high density equals tall box housing which means housing that is crammed in a small area. There are a lot of ways to design housing and there are many combinations and design choices. An example is to have retail space on the bottom and housing on the top. There could be rooftop gardens on top of the buildings, there could be underground parking. All of these ideas mean people can still enjoy a good quality of life even though it's in a smaller environment. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 8 Board member Ledvina said he doesn't have a problem with the density. There would be a lot of units but when you consider the plan as a whole, even though there will be a lot of people there will be many amenities to the people living in this area. Board member Ledvina said density is important and you have to be efficient with the land use today. This plan adds to the efficiency and he thinks this is an excellent design plan. Chairperson Olson said she is concerned about the issue of accessibility and is still troubled the city has no accessible housing in Legacy Village. If she achieves no other personal goal while serving time with the city she believes the Gladstone area needs to have accessible housing. She heard through some of the discussions that you have to have a minimum building height of four stories to justify an elevator, sometimes three stories, and two story buildings you can get by with stairs. By providing an elevator in a building you provide accessibility and people are going to be able to get in and out of their homes as opposed to a town home with steps that go up to the front door and steps going from level to level. Accessibility is one thing she will be watching very carefully to ensure that occurs in this development. Ms. Coleman said the reason builders or developers are reluctant to provide elevators is because of the cost. Ms. Coleman asked staff if there was a zoning restriction in the mixed use zoning for the Hillcrest area for building height restriction? Ms. Finwall said there is a three story height limit; four or more stories would require a conditional use permit which is in the current code as well. That is probably why you don't see buildings taller than three stories in Maplewood for residential. In Maplewood there is no height restriction for commercial buildings but the height is usually restricted by parking so that is the limiting factor there. Board member Shankar asked if the city is achieving the 800 unit density with three or four stories? Ms. Coleman said in the plan it says the city would allow up to five stories. It is not the city's intention to be that specific with this plan regarding where a three, four or five story building would be built. Although the city anticipates it would go in the core. The plan is more of a guide and if there were to be multi level buildings they would be in the core area. Chairperson Olson said she would prefer to keep the tallest buildings away from the roundabout as much as possible. She has had some comments made to her that there is a tunnel affect that you get if the taller buildings are pushed closer to the road. It can also create a safety hazard. She realizes that would act as a traffic calming device. Ms. Finwall said this plan calls for a stepping back of the taller buildings in the design elements. The first two stories of the building would be built up to the roadway with the third and consecutive floors stepping backward. Chairperson Olson asked if she understood that these buildings would have balconies, bump out windows, and a variety of textures and materials, that would give this more of a village feel? Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 9 Ms. Coleman said correct. That sounds like the perfect sales pitch. Commissioner Pearson asked how much private development does staff see having to occur before the aesthetics of the site (such as taking down power lines) begin? Mr. Ahl said assuming the city gets approvals in March 2006, he would expect the first project would be to bury power lines some time in 2006. From a technical standpoint it is very important to bury the power lines and that must happen first. Storm water improvements would happen secondary. Ms. Coleman thanked the board members and commissioners for taking the time to discuss the Gladstone project with city staff. If you have any other questions or comments feel free to e-mail city staff. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS Chairperson Olson said the board would like to suggest that any Maplewood residents that would like to serve on the CDRB should go to the city website to download an application and fill it out and turn it in at the city hall. The city is looking for applicants to fill the vacancy that was left by Diana Longrie who is now the Mayor of Maplewood. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Resolution of Appreciation for Diana Longrie Ms. Finwall said Diana Longrie served as a member of the CDRB for 3 years and 6 months. Ms. Longrie left the CDRB to be the Mayor of Maplewood. Staff recommends the board make a recommendation of resolution of appreciation for Diana Longrie. Board member Ledvina moved to adopt the resolution of Appreciation for Diana Longrie. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. b. Sign Code. Final Recommendation Ms. Finwall turned the sign code discussion over to Kevin Christianson. In December the community design review board (CDRB) reviewed public feedback received regarding the proposed draft sign code. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 10 Based on the public feedback and other research, the CDRB proposed final changes to code in the following areas: off-site directional and open house real estate signs; temporary signs and displays under (12) square feet in area; temporary banners; temporary window signs; wall signs; freestanding signs; and signs located within a planned unit development. Staff has included a copy of the draft sign code with the above-mentioned changes highlighted in blue for your review. Chairperson Olson thanked staff for highlighting the changes to the sigh code in blue for the board and said it has been very helpful. Board member Ledvina had comments from page 5 of the sign code regarding window signs and the statement that says "We Card". He would suggest having the code say "do not contain commercial message or signs which are legally required to be posted". On page 9 of the sign code regarding directional informational signs, he is uncomfortable with the "three feet in height" statement. He has seen directional signs over three feet in height which have been very functional and were necessary because of landscaping and the architecture and doesn't understand why that statement was added. Staff added that without any comment from the board. Staff gets that question quite a bit. Staff feels there would be an issue with a directional sign that is six feet high. Staff was referring to measurements of height from ground grade. The sign is limited to six square feet in area. Chairperson Olson said it's not so much the dimension of the sign as much as the language and the clarification of what the three feet in height is relative to. She asked if that could be clarified. If there is a berm or something there then three feet in height is too low. Board member Ledvina said maybe four or five feet in height would be more acceptable. Staff said anything over six feet high would require a structural engineering report and suggested the language state under 6 feet in height. Board member Ledvina had a question on page 11; regarding temporary signs and displays less than 12 square feet. He wondered why that was changed from "per year" to "per sign". He reads that to mean a business can put up a new sign every 30 days. Staff said temporary signs under 12 square feet do not require a permit for signs that are 12 square feet and under. The board had that discussion based on feedback from the public. Chairperson Olson said she would like to see commercial buildings with each separate tenant permitted "one" sign. She said a particular business on White Bear Avenue has two temporary signs and one sign has been there for a long time and the other sign just popped up the other day. She understood the code to read a location could only have one temporary sign. Staff said that is the proposed language and no more than three temporary signs would be allowed for multi-tenant buildings. So if there were 19 tenants there could only be three temporary signs at anyone time. Chairperson Olson asked how that pertains to Mogren's Corner on County Road C and White Bear Avenue? Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-10-2006 11 Staff said the temporary signs would be limited to 30 days each, one per tenant, with a maximum of three signs. So the tenants would have to rotate their usage of signs. Board member Ledvina said on page 13 of the sign code the window area coverage changed from 25% to 30% and he asked what that was based on. Chairperson Olson said she gave this some serious thought and she woUld like it to be at 50% of the window area because if the city gets a citizen advisory group who will be policing the signs it would be easier to estimate half of a window area then 30% of a window area. Board member Shankar said he thinks 25% of the window area is also easy to measure. Because of lack of time due to the joint meeting for the Gladstone Area Redevelopment Master Plan between the CDRB and the HRA, staff recommended tabling tHis item until the next CDRB meeting on Tuesday, January 24, 2006. Board member Ledvina moved to table this item until Tuesday, January 24, 2006. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Olson, Shankar The motion to table passed. Staff said the CDRB will begin with temporary banners at the next meeting January 24, 2006. c. Reappointment/Appointment Ms. Finwall said Ananth Shankar and John Hinzman's terms on the boalrd officially expired on January 1, 2006. Both Ananth Shankar and John Hinzman have agreed to serve another two year terms. Staff would like to thank the board members for their hard work. The past city council came up with a new policy to conduct interviews with the existing board and commission members along with any new applications to serve. This Was brought before the new city council and they decided they would like to continue with that procedure. Interviewing will take place in either February or March 2006. At this time there are two new applications for the CDRB. A notice of the CDRB opening was also placed in the city news. Staff is hoping to get more applications for this opening based on that notice. The two board members' terms have been extended until such time that the city council can conduct the interviews and Board Shankar and Board Hinzman have agreed to that. The city council appreciates what Board Shankar and Board Hinzman bring to the CDRB. The council is simply opening the process up to new applicants to ensure that anyone who is interested in serving on the CDRB has the ability to apply. Chairperson Olson said she would personally like to state that she. truly appreciates the knowledge that Ananth Shankar and John Hinzman bring to the CDRB and hope they can remain on the CDRB to serve another two year term. They both bring beneficial and important aspects to the CDRB and she hopes they can continue to share their knowledge. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:22 p.m.