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.