Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/25/2005 AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD January 25, 2005 6:00 P.M. City Council Chambers, Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: January 11, 2005 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Unfinished Business 6. Design Review a. Maplewood Public Works Facility Additions - 1902 County Road BEast 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Board Presentations 9. Staff Presentations a. CDRB member volunteer for February 14, 2005 city council meeting. Public works building addition to be reviewed. 10. Adjourn p:com_dvptIAgendas CDI1-25-05 Agenda MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JANUARY 25,2005 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Longrie called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Chairperson Diana Longrie Vice Chairperson Matt Ledvina Board member Judy Driscoll Board member Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Present Absent Absent Present Present Staff Present: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chairperson Longrie moved to approve the agenda. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Longrie, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for January 11, 2005. Chairperson Longrie had the following changes. On page 3, sixth paragraph, second sentence it should read She was concerned witR that the mitigation or street improvements as-should be part of the conditions put upon the developer of the site. Also on page 5, fourth paragraph in the last sentence she would like it changed to read SHe He said sHe he knows additional landscaping was mentioned by staff and that could help as well. (Chairperson Longrie was referring to something Mr. Ledvina had said in the paragraph and she wanted it clarified). Board member Shankar moved approval of the minutes of January 11,2005, as amended. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes ---Longrie, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 2 VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Maplewood Public Works Facility Additions - 1902 County Road BEast Mr. Ekstrand said Mr. Jeff Oertel, of Oertel Architects, has submitted plans on behalf of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer for the following additions and changes to the Maplewood Public Works Facility at 1902 County Road B: . Construction of a 4,224-square-foot (total of both floors), two-story office addition to the northwest corner of the building. . Construction of a 20,240-square-foot, one-story garage addition to the south side of the building. . Construction of a 9,600-square-foot, 40-foot-tall fabric-domed sand/salt storage structure in the storage yard. . Resurfacing of the building entrance with aluminum facing to match the architectural detailing on the proposed additions. . Construction of a holding pond at the south end of the storage yard. . Relocation of the security fence and entrance gate at the north side of the storage yard to coincide with the placement of the proposed garage addition. Mr. Ekstrand said the proposed materials and colors are: . Office addition - champagne-colored aluminum panels and tan wall panels. . Garage addition - tan colored precast concrete tip-up panels. . Front entry refacing-champagne-colored aluminum panels. . Existing building-to be painted tan to match the additions. . Salt-storage structure-beige. Mr. Ekstrand said staff recommends approval of the design review for the Public Works Building Addition. Chairperson Longrie asked how many staff members work in the public works building? Mr. Ekstrand said there are 33 total employees in the building and of that 33 employees there are roughly 15 office personnel. Chairperson Longrie said she read the salt/storage structure would be 43 feet high and she asked staff if Maplewood had any restrictions on building height? Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 3 Mr. Ekstrand said there is no height restriction for non-residential uses in the City of Maplewood. Chairperson Longrie asked if there was any discussion about moving the temporary impound lot to this location? Mr. Ekstrand said the city is working on a proposal by the Fire Chief to move the temporary impound lot over to the lot on Frost Avenue. Quality Restorations used to store construction vehicles on the site and the new owner of the property has granted permission to the city to store vehicles on the lot. This would only be a temporary location and the city would be looking for a permanent storage lot. Currently the storage of vehicles at the impound lot is on a gravel area so the vehicles are not consuming parking spaces that could be utilized by others. Even though there is a consistent movement of vehicles in and out of the impound lot it is a necessity for the police department. Chairperson Longrie asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Jeff Oertel, Oertel Architects at 1795 Saint Clair Avenue, St. Paul, addressed the board. Rather than replicate what is currently in place they chose to give the building a little more style and image for public works. The building is expanding in two areas. For the office area they are using a design that has a lot more articulation and would provide a lot more glass. View of the outside and having more daylight was a large issue for staff in this new space. Sand/salt storage buildings are around the metro area and are usually in a concealed location. Because of the technical requirements of loading high volumes of sand and salt undercover there are only a few covered options. They have constructed buildings of concrete, heavy timbers and of fabric. In their mind, for the money, the most attractive and most feasible would be the fabric-domed building. The fabric is like a roofing product and lasts about 20 years. If they use the fire retardant fabric there are four colors to choose from and if they use a regular fabric there are ten colors to choose from. Mr. Oertel provided a sample of the colored concrete tip-up panels, colored aluminum panels for the front entry refacing and office addition and fabric swatches that are both fire retardant and non-fire retardant for the domed storage building for the board to review. Chairperson Longrie asked what factors the board should consider when determining if the fabric should be fire retardant or not? Mr. Oertel said their next meeting will be with the fire marshal and the building official and they may express an opinion regarding what they prefer. Since the building would enclose sand and salt materials that are non-flammable the fear and worry about the structure is minimized but they would like some direction by the officials in this regard. Chairperson Longrie asked if there is was a difference in life expectancy for the fire retardant fabric verses the non-fire retardant fabric? Mr. Oertel said no there was not. There is only a slight difference in cost for the fire retardant material. Board member Shankar asked how the fabric held up to 40 mph winds? Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 4 Mr. Oertel said the design is based on the 70 mph winds plus. They have had similar buildings up for several years which have withstood the wind and there haven't been any problems with the fabric shearing or peeling apart. Board member Shankar asked when this fabric detail goes down to the ground does it meet up with a concrete slab or how does that work? Mr. Oertel said the fabric does not terminate at grade it's actually elevated above grade and there is a frame work that supports the fabric. This gives the fabric a form so every ten to twelve feet on center you see a line of support and the fabric emulates from panel to panel. The fabric goes down and is bolted to a concrete pier and above grade the fabric has a seam which runs along the base of the structure. The salt and sand mixture is held in place by either reinforced concrete of jersey barriers and that is the product that keeps the salt and sand away from the fabric. Board member Olson asked if the fabric would have a 20-year life expectancy? Mr. Oertel said the manufacturer expectancy is 20 years. They look at this similar to a membrane roof and warranties can be put into place for 10 and 20 years. He only knows of one project in Minnesota with a fabric roof that they worked on 1 0-to-12 years ago and there haven't been any problems there. He can't guarantee that the fabric would hold up that long because there has only been one other fabric roof built in the state so they have nothing to compare it to so they would have to fall back on the manufacturer warranty. Board member Shankar asked if there would be any interior lighting in the dome and if so would it transmit outside the structure? Mr. Oertel said currently they are not going to light the inside of the facility because the loaders would have head lights so the workers can see the material. As part of the overall plan they have wall-pack lights along the vehicle storage building that would provide some yard light that may be needed. This is all based on the city standard for cut off and the amount of light cast. Chairperson Longrie asked what the other product was besides the precast concrete tip-up panels that Mr. Oertel referred to. Mr. Oertel said the other sample was an exposed concrete product that was to large to bring tonight. Board member Olson asked if there was a cost difference between the exposed concrete and the precast concrete tip-up panels? Mr. Oertel said the cost is not significant. Additional costs come into play when you add design or sculptural elements on the fayade or coloring agents, but if they are in the same scope he doesn't see a cost factor. Because they are trying to conserve dollars they decided to go with complete monolithic walls without putting holes in the wall for the windows. As a part of the concept they essentially inverted the long spanning trusses to go upwards. Because they saved on the concrete wall, they were able to match the height of the existing building. The existing building has an internal clearance issue and is inadequate for current operations. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 5 Mr. Oertel said staff wanted more glass so the concept was to carry the same wall height, keep the walls simple and straight forward, elevate the roof at the parapet line and provide a translucent material for light to come in. Board member Shankar asked to see the sample of translucent material to be used. Mr. Oertel showed a glass product that is similar to one that was used at the Maplewood Community Center which lets diffused light in and is an insulated product. He also showed another product that was a slatted product with a lower insulation value. Board member Shankar asked what the warranty was against the glass turning yellow over time? Mr. Oertel said they are careful about approving products that the manufacturer doesn't take care of the yellowing component of the fiberglass. He believes it is a 20-year warranty against yellowing or a lifetime warranty against yellowing. He has used this product for close to 20 years now on about 20-25 projects and has had really good success with this product against yellowing. Board member Olson asked about the overhead doors on the end of the new building and what material they would be made of? Mr. Oertel said the overhead doors are proposed to be an insulated door with a metal skin and they are plan on having some vision lights with the door. They are proposing not to use an all glass door simply for reasons of energy efficiency. The door only comes in two finishes, white and bronze. However, not all manufacturers make the bronze color. They could paint the doors; however, in the past the painted doors fade quickly and become a maintenance issue. Board member Olson asked what Mr. Oertel's color preference for the overhead doors would be, white or bronze color? Mr. Oertel said that would depend on what color fabric they use for the salt and sand storage building. If the board recommended using the white fabric or even the translucent fabric they would recommend white overhead doors. Otherwise, he would go with the bronze color overhead door if they can find them in the industry. Board member Shankar asked if there would be any roof-top mounted equipment? Mr. Oertel said no. The plan is to use a high-quality metal roof and to put all the mechanical equipment either indoors or on the roof of the old building. By putting the equipment on the old building they don't have to worry about screening the equipment. When they put the metal roof on they expect the roof to last a very long time. They are planning on having the penetrations for the radiant heat through the side wall so the new metal roof would be maintenance free. Chairperson Longrie asked staff to review the landscaping plan for the board. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 6 Mr. Ekstrand said the landscaping focuses around the new entry way and office addition. There would be prairie plantings in front of the first story of the first addition and evergreen trees that would flank the entrance drive. There will be about two or three evergreen trees that would be lost due to the construction but the city would be planting evergreens in other areas to balance with what is across the way to create an entrance feature. There would be a total of eight evergreens and prairie plantings on the landscaping plan. Board member Olson asked if the remaining area would be sodded or seeded? Mr. Ekstrand said it would be sodded. Chairperson Longrie asked if there would be any trees to shield the sand and salt storage building? Mr. Ekstrand said no just the prairie grasses. There really is not a place to plant trees that would screen the area for the neighbors benefit. Chairperson Longrie said she noticed a future rain garden on the plans. Mr. Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer addressed the board. Mr. Cavett said the rain garden would be constructed as part of the improvements to the parking lot which is in very poor condition. Chairperson Longrie asked if that would be paid for as part of the money from the Environmental Utility Fee? Mr. Cavett said if money was used from the Environmental Utility Fee that could help fund that project and the city would be looking into doing demonstrations of pervious pavement as well as look at getting some grants from the Metro Watershed District. Board member Olson said when she calculated the height of the storage building it appeared it will be taller than the public works building. Mr. Oertel said that is correct and the reason the height of the salt and sand storage building is that tall is because they anticipate the MPCA is going to enact with the assistance of the state legislature requiring all salt be loaded, mixed, stored and dumped under cover. Those loads come in big boxed semi trucks. When the end dump goes up it elevates over 30 feet high and the idea is that both in the short and long term when an end dump comes back to dump its load it can take place under cover. The salt building was designed so that it can expand to further assist the end dump load. This is a requirement that they are planning for so they can be prepared for the future. Board member Olson asked if they were concerned about any salt runoff going down into the pond? Mr. Oertel said they are always concerned about salt runoff. They have a policy to get as close to a zero point pollution as possible. The jersey barriers are set up and penned to contain the salt load and it will be contained 99.9% in the area. The engineer designed the site to minimize any runoff from the load area. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 7 Mr. Oertel said should the salt migrate, the idea is for the salt to go into the pond where there will be a clay liner to help contain the salt runoff. It's a specific design to minimize salt runoff as opposed to the way the salt is stored now. Board member Olson said they have done a good job of containing the cost of the project and is a very efficient design. Chairperson Longrie said if there isn't a cost difference she would like to see a variety of building materials selected so it would give the building more eye appeal especially considering it's such a large building. She is leaning towards the textured precast concrete tip- up panels and then the exposed aggregate. She would prefer the bronze colored overhead doors if the color is available over the color white. Otherwise, she would like to use a fabric color that looks good with the white door if they can't get the bronze color door. Board member Olson said she likes the two textures but the precast concrete tip-up panel sample the architect brought is too yellow particularly compared to the aluminum panel color that was submitted and she would prefer more of a tan color. She doesn't like the translucent fabric material for the salt storage building nor does she care for the white color. It would gather dirt deposits as it weathers which would stand out. She would rather see an opaque product rather than a translucent product. She prefers the bronze colored overhead doors compared to the white color. Board member Olson wondered if they chose to use the fire retardant fabric would the life of the fabric be extended. Board member Shankar said he would like to see white overhead doors and the lighter fabric color used on the storage building but he does not like the translucent fabric or the stark white color. He would like to see the non-slotted window calwall used that the architect displayed. All three board members preferred the calwall window product over the slotted sample. Chairperson Longrie said the board heard the retention pond would be lined with a clay liner, she asked if that was something the board needed to add to the conditions? Mr. Ekstrand said in a way that is already covered by condition number 2. That should be left up to the engineers to design the pond with the clay liner but if the board wants to point out they want strict attention given to the pond for pollution prevention reasons that would be ok. Board member Olson asked if there were any issues regarding noise from the residents with large trucks driving in and out? Mr. Ekstrand said no there wasn't; however, one resident was concerned that the traffic on County Road B was too heavy already. Other than construction activity there is no anticipated change in traffic load. Public Works expects to hire one additional employee over the next five years so there would be no additional employee traffic anticipated. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 8 Board member Olson moved approval of the plans date-stamped December 17, 2004. This approval is subject to the applicant and property owner complying with the following conditions: (Changes or additions are underlined and in bold) 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 1. Comply with all requirements of the city engineer regarding grading, drainage, erosion control and utilities. The Citv Enaineer shall also review the desian includina the desian of the retention pond to prevent pollution that mav result from the salt storaae buildina. The Citv Enaineer should address if there is anv existina salt contamination and if clean UP is needed. 3. Any retaining walls over four feet tall shall be designed by a structural engineer and have a protective fence on top. Staff shall approve the retaining wall and fence design if used. 4. The proposed evergreen trees shall be at least six feet tall, balled and burlapped. 5. With any regarding of the storage yard, the yard edge must be set back at least 15 feet from the southerly lot line. 6. Provide handicap-parking spaces in accordance with the building official's requirements. 7. Comply with the requirements of the fire marshal as noted in the staff report. 8. The director of community development may approve minor changes to these plans. 9. The followina buildina materials and colors are to be used: The calwallliaht-panel svstem. a cream colored fire retardant fabric to be used on the storaae buildina. a varied textured precast concrete tip-up panels on the maintenance buildina and a white colored overhead aaraae door. The architect shall provide a precast concrete tip-up sample for staff to approve other than the vellow sample that was provided at the CDRB meetina Januarv 25. 2005. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes - Longrie, Olson, Shankar Board member Shankar made a friendly amendment that the architect should provide a different precast concrete tip-up sample that shall be less in yellow color than the sample provided at the CDRB meeting tonight. Chairperson Longrie made a friendly amendment under number 2. to say including the design of the retention pond to prevent pollution that may result from the salt and storage building. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on February 14, 2005. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 9 VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present but visitors are always encouraged to attend the CDRB meetings. VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS a. Update on the Gladstone Task Force Committee Meeting Board member Olson is on the Gladstone Task Force Committee and gave a brief update regarding the January 19, 2005, meeting held from 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the fire station on Clarence Street. Additional information regarding the Gladstone area is posted on the city website. There are six task force meetings over the coming months. A report will be presented to the city council in August 2005. A bus tour is scheduled for Saturday, January 29, 2005, for the Gladstone Task Force Committee to visit several cities. There will be three public meetings for the public to attend. b. Board member Shankar represented the CDRB at the January 24, 2005, city council meeting. The only CDRB item was Maplewood Imports Auto Center at 2450 Maplewood Drive which was approved by the city council. Mr. Shankar said even though Ken Roberts, City Planner said a traffic study was done, the city council still had concerns regarding the traffic and the impact on the area with the development of the Maplewood Imports Auto Center. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. CDRB representative at the February 14, 2005, city council meeting. Board member Olson will represent the CDRB at the February 14, 2005, city council meeting. The only item to discuss is the Maplewood Public Works Facility Addition at 1902 County Road BEast. b. Filling in for Ms. Finwall at the CDRB meetings. Mr. Ekstrand said he would be presenting the CDRB meetings during Ms. Finwall's absence. c. Board Members CDRB Term Expirations. Mr. Ekstrand said Diana Longrie, Linda Olson and Matt Ledvina's CDRB terms on the Community Design Review Board have expired and he asked if Chairperson Longrie and Board member Olson were interested in extending their terms. They both said yes they did. Board member Ledvina was absent from this evenings meeting. Board member Shankar's term expires next year. Community Design Review Board Minutes 1-25-2005 10 d. Board member Judy Driscoll's Resignation. Mr. Ekstrand stated Board member Judy Driscoll has resigned from serving as a CDRB Board member due to conflicts with her evening work schedule. The city is advertising for openings on the board and commissions and is accepting applications. e. Sign Code Revision Update Status. Mr. Ekstrand said because Ms. Finwall has been on leave no further revisions have been made to the sign code since Rose Lorsung worked on the revisions. Rose accepted another position in another city and the city staff recently interviewed another intern today. City staff hopes to soon have someone in place to continue the work on the sign code revision update. x. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m.