HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/09/2006
AGENDA
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Tuesday, May 9, 2006
6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes: April 25, 2006
5. Unfinished Business: None Scheduled
6. Design Review:
a. Comforts of Home Assisted Living Facility - 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street
7. Visitor Presentations:
8. Board Presentations:
9. Staff Presentations:
a. CDRB Representation at the May 22, 2006, City Council Meeting - Items to Be
Discussed Include Comforts of Home
b. Draft Sign Code Update
10. Adjourn
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, MAY 9, 2006
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Board member John Hinzman
Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina
Chairperson Linda Olson
Board member Joel Schurke
Board member Ananth Shankar
Present until 6:40 p.m.
Absent
Present
Present
Present
Staff Present:
Shann Finwall, Planner
Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Board member Hinzman moved to approve the agenda.
Board member Shankar seconded.
Ayes - Hinzman, Olson, Schurke, Shankar
The motion passed.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of the CDRB minutes for April 25, 2006
Chairperson Olson moved to table the approval of the minutes of April 25, 2006, until the next
meeting.
Board member Shankar seconded.
Ayes --- Hinzman, Olson, Schurke, Shankar
The motion passed.
V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
VI. DESIGN REVIEW
a. Comforts of Home Assisted Living Facility - 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street
Ms. Finwall said Mathew Frisbie of Frisbie Architects, Inc., representing Comforts of Home is
proposing to redevelop two lots located on the southeast corner of Highway 36 and Hazelwood
Street (2300 and 2310 Hazelwood Street). The two lots currently contain the vacant Auto
Glass store and an electrical contractor's office.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
2
The proposed use on the 3.025 acre lot will be a 42-unit, two-story, assisted living facility. The
facility will also include memory care, respite care, and a hospice facility with 24-hour, on-site
homecare staff.
The planning commission recommended approval of the comprehensive land use plan change
and conditional use permit at their May 1, 2006, meeting. The community design review board
should make a recommendation on the design elements of the project including architectural,
site plan, landscaping, and lighting.
Ms. Finwall distributed a revised grading and drainage plan to the CDRB that staff received on
May 8, 2006.
Chairperson Olson said she read there was neighborhood opposition to this proposal based on
the potential traffic in the area which would require the city to upgrade Hazelwood Avenue.
Staff said Hazelwood Avenue was to be upgraded in 2009, she asked if that road was already
on the city's long range schedule for reconstnuction or was it added to the constnuction
schedule because of this proposal?
Ms. Finwall said Hazelwood Avenue was on the city's road constnuction calendar to be
reconstructed in 2009 before this proposal came forward.
Chairperson Olson asked if the sidewalk for Comforts of Home would be deferred until 2009
because of the road improvement project?
Ms. Finwall said the city's engineering department felt it best to have the developer submit an
escrow for the sidewalk rather than build it right away. If the city required the developer to
install the sidewalk now the city may find out it did not meet the design standards and the
sidewalk would have to be removed and replaced in 2009.
Chairperson Olson asked if that was correct then the road assessments would not be charged
to the homeowners until 2009?
Ms. Finwall said that's correct as proposed in the city's capital improvement plan.
Board member Shankar asked if there would be staff working in this facility such as dining
staff?
Ms. Finwall said there would be full time employees working at Comforts of Home. During the
day there would be 5 to 6 employees and in the evening they would have about 3 employees.
Board member Shankar asked if 25 parking stalls would be sufficient based on that count?
Ms. Finwall said because none of the residents would have vehicles, the only parking that
would be needed is for visitors and the employees. Comforts of Home said this type of parking
has worked at their other locations and they are confident the parking would be sufficient for
their needs at this site. The parking was discussed at length during the Planning Commission
meeting on May 1, 2006. The parking reduction was included as part of the PUD which was
reviewed and recommended for approval by the PC.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
3
Board member Shankar asked if the residents would be transported by a van? Where would
the van park? Where would the van pick up the residents? He did not see a wide enough
parking stall on the parking plan.
Ms. Finwall said there is a drive aisle. In the event the transportation van picks the residents up
they could park the van in front of the building.
Board member Schurke asked staff about the recommendation to change the Colorado blue
spruce plantings to Black hills spruce on the landscaping plan? He asked if Black hills spruce
was native to Minnesota or what was the rationale for the change?
Ms. Finwall said the experience in Maplewood has been that the Colorado blue spruce tree
gets a fungus and doesn't last as long in Minnesota.
Board member Schurke asked if the recommendation for the 6 to 8 foot high berm was
primarily for noise mitigation from Highway 36?
Ms. Finwall said the engineering department recommended the berm for noise mitigation, but it
will also add a nice visual buffer from Highway 36 as well.
Board member Schurke asked if the noise study or documentation had been done yet for this
site?
Ms. Finwall said .that information would be required prior to issuance of a building permit. That
information could come after the fact as well. The developer would also be using building
materials that are for noise reduction such as thicker walls, windows, and insulation.
Board member Hinzman asked about the revised grading and drainage plan and if that
satisfied the staff's concern about the additional berm height along Highway 36? It appears
some areas of the berm are only 3 feet in height.
Ms. Finwall said the revised grading and drainage plan was received by staff on Monday, May
8, 2006, and staff has not had the opportunity to have the engineering department review this.
Staff would have to verify that.
Chairperson Olson said she watched the broadcast of the Planning Commission meeting on
Monday, May 1, 2006, and remembered there was quite a bit of discussion regarding the
berm. She asked if that information was included in the packet?
Ms. Finwall said the only thing that was included in the packet was the recommendation that
the berm be 6 to 8 feet in height.
Board member Schurke said that recommendation is shown in the staff report on page 10,
item 2. b.
Board member Schurke asked if Comforts of Home owns the island for Knuckle Head Lake?
The applicant shook his head no that they do not own the island for Knuckle Head Lake.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
4
Chairperson Olson asked the applicant to address the board.
Mr. Mathew Frisbie, Frisbie Architects, 215 North 2nd Street, Suite 204, River Falls, Wisconsin,
addressed the board.
Mr. Brian Winges, Owner of Comforts of Home, 2340 County Road J East, White Bear
Township, addressed the board. Mr. Winges said Comforts of Home serves the needs of
residents who need a lot of care. The residents would not be picked up and driven to a
shopping center for example because these are people that need help with getting dressed,
bathing, and sometimes assistance with eating. Family members may come and take their
loved one to the doctor or out for the day, but that would be about it. The parking requirements
are sufficient.
Chairperson Olson asked if they would anticipate having gatherings such as a Mothers Day
tea in the future? The reason she asked is because this would bring a lot of visitors and she
wondered where those people would park.
Mr. Winges said they do not hold large functions or parties at Comforts of Home facilities. The
issue of gatherings and parking needs was addressed with the planning commission. They
don't have the ability to have a large gathering here. The commons area is geared to a home-
like setting: there is no large dining room or anything like that. People are welcome to visit their
loved one anytime, Mothers Day, Christmas, or Thanksgiving but there is no large gatherings
scheduled for people to come all on one day. This is a very acute population and it can be
difficult to even get the residents mobile.
Chairperson Olson asked how many employees there would be?
Mr. Winges said they would have about 5 to 6 daytime employees and around 3 employees in
the evening. They have what is called a universal employee where they do all the functions
that are needed and move from one function to the other. They do not have a separate food
staff, cleaning staff, and nursing staff. This allows them a sufficient number of employees that
keep busy throughout the three shifts. Sometimes a manager stops in occasionally so that may
be an additional car in the parking lot: otherwise the parking needs are very similar from
location to location.
Chairperson Olson said that doesn't sound like many employees to care for 42 residents:
especially depending on their care needs and only having 3 staff members at night.
Mr. Winges said those numbers are actually above the industry average. Some facilities only
have 1 staff member for 60 residents.
Chairperson Olson asked if the meals would be cooked on site or delivered to the facility?
Mr. Winges said the meals would be cooked on site: they try to have home cooked style
meals.
Chairperson Olson asked where delivery vehicles would be making deliveries?
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
5
Mr. Mark Paschke, Frisbie Architects, addressed the board. He said the drop off area would be
off of Hazelwood Avenue. There is a secondary exit directly off of the kitchen and that is where
most of the deliveries would occur on site. There would be two food deliveries per week. There
would also be a walk-in freezer and refrigerator which would allow for less food deliveries.
Chairperson Olson asked if there would be a laundry pick up and delivery service?
Mr. Winges said the laundry is done in-house for the residents by the employees so there
would be no laundry deliveries. The cost of the laundry service is included in the monthly living
expenses.
Chairperson Olson said it sounds like there would be minimal delivery trucks coming to this
facility.
Mr. Winges said yes, that is correct and that is another reason the Comforts of Home have
built in residential neighborhoods. They have always been concerned about traffic and things
of that nature. They have designed the building with that in mind and that is the way the
building is staffed. The laundry is done individually. Residents have their own sheets and their
own clothes. The laundry is not all dumped together and washed together. It's done
individually.
Board member Shankar asked if there is an outdoor space in the back of the facility?
Mr. Winges said yes.
Board member Shankar said it appears there is a large grade drop there. He asked if they are
concerned about that?
Mr. Frisbee said there is a fence and guard rail system on both levels.
Mr. Paschke said that is represented as A4 in the staff report and identifies the guard rail at
both levels.
Mr. Winges said the residents would go outside and sit down and enjoy the weather. They
would not be outside walking or hiking so it is not a problem to have a gated sitting area.
Mr. Paschke said there is a third outdoor space on the front of the building on the south side
for the memory care patients.
Chairperson Olson asked if there is a separate locked area for the Alzheimer's patients or will
their individual units be secured?
Mr. Winges said there is a separate eating and activity area for the Alzheimer's patients.
Depending on the number of memory or Alzheimer's patients they do have the ability to lock
certain areas of the building.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
6
Board member Hinzman said this is a great looking facility and this is going to be a nice
addition to this site. On the southeast corner of the building is a 30-inch oak tree that is about
10 feet off the building site and is proposed to be eliminated. He asked if there would be a way
to save that tree?
Mr. Frisbee said he would have to look into that. They have adjusted the building to the south
to meet other requirements but they will check into the proximity of the oak tree. If there is a
way to shift the building to preserve the tree they will see what they can do.
Chairperson Olson said in looking at the grading and erosion control plan she was wondering if
they were proposing underground drainage from the rainwater garden into the wetland?
Mr. Frisbee said typically with a rainwater garden it's for pretreatment of the storm water so
they catch all the sediment and at some point there would be an overflow. They would then be
allowed to overflow into the wetland area so they can take a look at that.
Chairperson Olson asked if it would still be permeable?
Mr. Frisbee said yes.
Mr. Paschke said that would be addressed through the permit with the watershed district. They
want the overflow spillway taken to the wetland basin to avoid any erosion of the hillside.
Board member Hinzman said the 6 to 8 foot high berm appears to be very tight on the site
plan. He asked what the thoughts were regarding the engineering recommendation for the 6 to
8 foot high berm?
Mr. Paschke said they are working with the Maplewood City Engineer, Michael Thompson,
regarding maximizing the berm where they can. With the addition of planting the trees, the
steeper you get that berm the greater the risk you have of freezing your trees out. They are
doing what they can to make that work.
Board member Hinzman asked if they are cutting the site down much in this location? The
reason he asked is if the site is lower than the benm could be lower.
Mr. Frisbee said they are matching the elevations of Hazelwood Avenue so that blends in.
Hazelwood Avenue is at 919 and slopes down to 918 at the parking lot and back up to 918.75
at the first floor of the building. The northeast corner of the property has a few higher spots for
a higher berm.
Board member Schurke said he agrees with the comments made by Board member Hinzman
that this is a very nicely designed proposal, he was happy to see such quality building
materials being used. He said it appears the floor plan is flipped on the elevations.
Mr. Paschke said the color rendering presented tonight is a project under construction in White
Bear Lake. This plan is a mirror of the project being built in White Bear Lake so it is reversed
on the plan.
Chairperson Olson asked if they had building samples to show the board?
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
7
Mr. Frisbee presented samples of some of the materials they would be using on this project
while Mr. Paschke passed a colored board around to each of the board members representing
their Hudson, Wisconsin building.
Board member Schurke asked if the applicant was aware of the energy design assistance
program for Xcel customers in Minnesota which they may qualify for. He said this program
could save your facility a substantial amount of money. The utility rebates are based on the
improvements on the buildings from an energy quality standpoint relative to a cash rebate from
the utility. Perhaps the architect is already aware of this program.
Mr. Frisbee said they have not been a part of that program for this proposal but he would have
to take a closer look at this to see if this would qualify for it.
Board member Schurke said the plans do not call out the R values for the building materials
being used on this project and he asked about each of the R values. He said he noticed they
are using CMU block construction. He asked if they had thought about using insulated
concrete forms. That may be something to look into for the sound attenuation potential for that
kind of product he said. Another product that gets sound attenuation is structural insulated
panel systems. Knowing there are sound issues that are being driven for residential issues he
would have concerns about the aesthetics regarding the berm along Highway 36. He would
like to see more of this building from Highway 36 because of the nice design features. He
asked if the owner thought how the building could be converted to another use if there is no
longer a market for this type of use?
Mr. Paschke said the structure would be completely non-combustible construction which is the
most restricted construction available. It is fully sprinklered. This type of facility allows clientele
to age in place and if the care becomes more acute at some point the owner could upgrade
their license and go with more of a skilled nursing facility. As far as changing the building to
another residential occupancy that would be tied to the PUD and that would have to be
reviewed by the city. Structurally it's an 1-2 construction class. Fire resistant ratings and safety
issues are of the utmost importance in this type of a facility, especially for residents that are
unable to respond to emergency situations on their own.
Mr. Winges said he works with developers who said this building could be converted to office
condominiums. His understanding is that this building is adaptable, it would cost some money
to change things, but it could be done. Mr. Winges said they have never had a problem with
filling rooms at any of their buildings. Their buildings fill up in a matter of months and they are
very confident with the demand for this type of facility.
Board member Schurke said he applauds the quality standard that they reach for with
Comforts of Home. This stands out above a lot of other types of facilities he has toured. He
said his mother is in this age bracket but she does not require this type of facility yet but this
outranks any other buildings he has seen quality wise.
Mr. Winges thanked him for his comments.
Chairperson Olson agreed with the comments regarding the quality of the design. This building
is going to fill up fast because there is a need for this type of housing. She did not notice a
space dedicated for large muscle activities.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
8
Mr. Winges said there is not a lot of exercise going on because of the type of resident they
care for. They don't have a need for a large exercise area. They do have daily activities which
are held in the common areas.
Chairperson Olson asked if a large part of their clientele use wheelchairs or walkers?
Mr. Winges said there are a fair number that do. The mobility problem is not something you
would find in a typical assisted living home such as Presbyterian Homes, Alterra or Sunrise.
They are taking the elderly residents that those types of facilities won't accept but are not
ready or don't need to move to a nursing home. He would welcome the CDRB to visit their
locations to see what type of residents they care for and what their facilities look like. The
residents do get light exercise.
Chairperson Olson asked if there would be elevators in this facility.
Mr. Winges said yes.
Mr. Frisbee showed a building sample board to the board and said they would use a 40-year
architectural shingle, a Hardy cement plank siding painted with two colors along with white
trim, reddish toned brick, and arts and crafts style lighting.
Chairperson Olson said Alzheimer patients can be very clever and she asked if they anticipate
residents trying to escape from the building?
Mr. Winges said they have had a lot of experience with residents trying to escape the
buildings. Comforts of Home has gotten pretty good at anticipating people trying to escape and
keeping a close eye on those individuals. They do their best to design the building so that it's
very difficult for the patients to get out. Staff does not have the man power to continually keep
a resident from trying to leave the building. It's stated in the resident's lease that if they
continue to leave the facility they will have to move to more of a lock down facility such as a
nursing home.
Board member Schurke asked if they could review the R values for the building materials they
will be using for this facility.
Mr. Paschke said the walls would have R-19 walls with 6-inch steel studs and 6-inches of
batting insulation, 4-inch veneer occurs at the cultured stone base that comes up 40 inches
and gives a backing to apply the stone veneer, the brick sits on top of that, the roof is R-40, he
wasn't sure of the E-value for the window.
Mr. Frisbee said they would use Eagle windows which are high quality windows. He would
have to check on the E-value of the window. MnDOT would have certain requirements on the
side of the building facing Highway 36.
Board member Schurke asked how the facility would be heated?
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
9
Mr. Frisbee said there is a series of forced air units throughout the building, multiple zones,
and a variety of smaller units rather than a larger package unit so they have more control over
the buildings. The main floor has in-floor heat and forced air on the second floor and ventilation
for the first floor.
Board member Shankar asked if they would have one elevator as you would enter the
building?
Mr. Paschke said yes.
Board member Shankar thought an elevator that is 3' X 6' is hardly enough room for a
wheelchair to fit inside.
Mr. Paschke said that is a gurney approved emergency sized elevator cab.
Chairperson Olson asked what the emergency plan was for the residents in the second floor if
there are no egress windows?
Mr. Winges said typically he would have his operations person speak regarding the emergency
plan but she was unable to attend the meeting tonight. The evacuation plan is run through the
state since assisted living facilities are licensed through the State of Minnesota. They also
coordinate things through the Fire Chief for emergencies as well.
Board member Shankar asked if they would consider making the entire front curb handicapped
zero curb rather than just a five foot section being zero curb?
Mr. Frisbee said they could look at that with their civil engineer but when they get to a zero
curb if the drainage for that area is not set correctly there can be ponding and icing but they
could look into that. With a smaller curb cut they can control water and where it is directed a lot
better.
Board member Shankar said he brings the issue up because he is concerned about the
resident's safety having a curb to step up or down from. He said it is safer to have a flat
surface for them to walk up and off of.
Mr. Frisbee said their Hudson, Wisconsin facility has four steps to enter the building so when
there are deliveries at that location the people have to go up four steps to enter the building. At
this facility he imagines delivery trucks would pull right up to the curb, take out their two
wheeler and make the delivery. The curb actually protects the building from vehicles that would
get too close to the building itself with zero curb.
Board member Schurke said he didn't notice this before but the trash enclosure doorway faces
the line of traffic. He asked if they could rotate it to the north and west and have it open to the
south and east. This could also help save an additional parking space.
Board member Paschke said perhaps the city would accept that in lieu of having the berm?
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
10
Board member Schurke said he would prefer not to see a continuous line of trees on the berm
along Highway 36. The lesson he learned from a landscape architect was to plant things in an
odd number and you never plant things in a straight line. Personally he thinks the Comforts of
Home building is such a nice building design with quality building materials that it should be
visible from Highway 36 and the landscaping berm should not be the detraction. He would
prefer to have the building owner spend the money on building materials such as higher quality
triple pane windows, wall systems and insulation to mitigate sound and give a better energy
benefit rather than planting landscaping to use as a berm and help with freeway sound. This
would also help reduce the energy cost as well. Basically if the recommendation for the berm
is being driven for sound mitigation he would prefer building materials be used instead of
requiring the berm. If the berm is being driven for another reason he would prefer to see the
building from Highway 36 and others should be able to visually enjoy the building features. His
landscape architect told him 75 feet of vegetation depth is needed to see a measurable drop in
decibel level to make a difference. He lives close to the freeway and MnDOT recently put up
the concrete barriers for safety. However, the freeway noise bounces off of the barriers and out
to the neighboring homes making it louder than usual. He uses this as an example that certain
things do not help with sound mitigation.
Mr. Frisbee said on the north side of the building, directly off of Highway 36 there are no
resident rooms that will open to that area so they are not going to be affected by the noise
level.
Board member Shankar said the finished floor elevation is 918 feet and Highway 36 is 928 feet
so even if there is a 6 to 8 foot high berm you would still be 10 feet above it and see the grade
along the building and see most of the building anyways.
Mr. Winges said they have resident rooms along Highway 65 at their Blain location and they
haven't had a complaint about the noise. His experience has been people enjoy living close to
the freeway and looking out at the traffic. This building would be set back 140 feet from the
property line too.
Chairperson Olson said she feels this building has been very well thought out and designed
and will be an asset to the community. She really likes the fact that this is a non-combustible
building and she is impressed with the proposal.
Board member Schurke said he isn't against the berm, he would just like to know that the berm
is providing the qualities that the city is expecting of the berm from a sound buffering
standpoint. If it is being required for sound reasons he would like the city to have proof that the
berm is going to do what they would like the berm to do before the owner invests that kind of
money in planting the 6 to 8 foot high berm. If the berm is for aesthetics he would prefer to see
the building from Highway 36 rather than looking at the trees.
Chairperson Olson said she doesn't think the berm is going to help mitigate sound.
Board member Shankar said the building is handsome and he thinks the berm will help with
some of the sound, he is not sure how much of the sound though. The berm adds an aesthetic
value to the property so he views the berm as a positive thing for both sound and aesthetic
value to the property.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
11
Ms. Finwall said staff received the revised grading plan on Monday, May 8, 2006, and staff
hopes the revised plans are okay with the engineering staff. Since the noise complaint at the
St. Paul Pioneer Press facility located across Highway 36, staff has become more educated on
noise mitigation. The PVC fence was installed to help with the noise at that location and the
neighbors state the noise is worse. A benm or landscaping is a much better noise buffer
compared to any type of fence. A wood fence is a better noise buffer compared to a PVC
fence. Staff feels the berm and landscaping will have some effect, staff is just not sure how
much of an effect it will have, but aesthetically and for noise mitigation it's a good design
feature.
Board member Schurke said given the community concerns he would recommend that the
owner hold an open house as soon as possible to invite the neighborhood into the facility when
it is complete and have staff available to answer questions relating to how you operate the
facility.
Mr. Winges said the construction workers on site have pamphlets to hand out to people if
requested and the workers can walk curious visitors around the site.
Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date stamped March 27, 2006, for the 42-
unit, two-story, assisted living facility (Comforts of Home) to be located at the southeast corner
of Highway 36 and Hazelwood Street (currently 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street). Approval is
subject to the applicant doing the following:
a. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
b. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant must submit to staff for
approval the following items:
1) Revised grading and drainage plan which meets all requirements as spelled out
in the April 25, 2006, engineer review, including the installation of a 6 to 8 foot
high berm on the north and northwest side of the lot and the submittal of an
escrow to cover the construction of a 6-foot wide sidewalk along the entire
frontage of Hazelwood Street.
2) Revised landscape plan showing the following:
a) The Colorado blue spruce should be changed to black hills spruce.
b) The landscape plan should reflect the required 6 to 8 foot high berm.
The berm should be planted with the black hills spruce on the sides and
top. The trees should be planted 15 feet on center (approximately 20 to
25 trees).
c) Plantings should be shown in the infiltration pond and rainwater garden.
The plantings should include pre-approved native seed mixtures.
d) The landscape area called out on the main floor plan in front of the entry
canopies (sheet A2) should be reflected on the landscape plan.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
12
e) A planting bed should be included in the interior of the loop driveway (in
between the driveway and the road).
f) Two additional sugar maple trees should be planted along Hazelwood
Street.
g) All landscaping (excluding landscaping within the infiltration basin and
rainwater garden) must be irrigated. The landscape plan must reflect the
location of all required underground irrigation sprinkler heads.
h) All disturbed areas must be re-established with turf.
i) The applicant must take all means necessary to protect the large trees
on the property during construction of the facility.
3) Revised lighting and photometries plan which shows that the height of the
freestanding lights do not exceed 25 feet (measured from ground grade to the
top of the lumen).
4) Watershed district approval.
5) Building material samples.
6) The owner shall combine the two properties into one lot for tax identification
purposes before the city issues a building permit.
7) A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior
improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work.
c. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building:
1) Replace any property irons removed because of this construction.
2) Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and
driveways.
3) Install all required landscaping and an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all
landscaped areas.
4) Install all required outdoor lighting.
5) Install wetland buffer signs which indicate that no mowing, cutting, or building is
permitted within the 25-foot buffer.
d. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
1) The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or
welfare.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
13
2) The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of
Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall
complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 of the following year if
occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter or within six weeks of occupancy
of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer.
e. Signs are not approved with this design review approval. All signs must be approved by
the community design review board before installation.
f. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
Chairperson Olson seconded.
Ayes - Olson, Shankar, Schurke
The motion passed.
This item goes to the city council on May 22, 2006
VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
No visitors present.
VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS
a. Board member Shankar was scheduled to be the CDRB representative at the May
8, 2006, City Council meeting. Staff notified Board member Shankar he did not
need to be present because there were no CDRB items to discuss.
Ms. Finwall said the city council discussed an amendment to the Noise Ordinance
to make it clearer, had the first reading of the accessory stnucture ordinance, and the
vacation of an easement. The city council also scheduled a special meeting for
June 5, 2006, to make a final decision on the Gladstone Redevelopment Plan.
Chairperson Olson asked if staff could get the CDRB a copy of the Noise Ordinance.
b. Board member Schurke recommended that city staff contact the Program Manager for
the Energy Design Assistance Program for Xcel Energy to see how they could be
proactive in providing applicants with information about energy conservation
applications for future commercial applications. Architects don't always know these
types of programs exist for owners.
Board member Shankar said he would see more of an advantage to have someone like
an Acoustical or Sound Engineer would come in to discuss noise mitigation with
landscaping, berms, and fencing. Energy Design Assistance is valuable to some clients
but he does not see with the types of applications the CDRB has been reviewing that a
presentation from Xcel Energy would be applicable or beneficial.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 5-09-2006
14
Chairperson Olson said some large applications like 3M have their own energy auditor
but that discussion or presentation by Xcel Energy may be applicable for some
applicants. (An example would be the Second Harvest proposal and their refrigeration
system the CDRB recently discussed.) She agrees with Board member Shankar
regarding having a noise mitigation discussion or speaker.
Board member Schurke recommended that the CDRB members compile a list of topic
or discussion areas they would like to have presenters come in and speak to help the
board understand future application needs. He would like to hear about storm water
mitigation measures, noise mitigation, light pollution, design flexibility, designing a
building and the site for safety, and energy conservation issues.
IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
a. Board member Shankar will be the CDRB representative at the May 22, 2006, city
council meeting.
Items to discuss include the Comforts of Home at 2300/2310 Hazelwood Street and the
Sign Code interpretation and Electronic Reader Boards.
b. Draft Sign Code Update
Ms. Finwall said she gave a presentation on the Draft Sign Code update to the city
council. It did not appear the city council had many changes to the draft sign code. She
said she discussed code enforcement with the city council which the city council
showed a lot of interest on. More information will follow.
X. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m.