Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/13/2007 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2007 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Board member John Demko Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina Chairperson Linda Olson Board member Ananth Shankar Board member Matt Wise Present Absent Present Absent Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Demko moved to approve the agenda as amended, removing approval of the October 23, 2007 minutes due to lack of a quorum for that approval. Board member Wise seconded. The motion passed. Ayes - all IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Maplewood Business Center (1616 and 1730 Gervais Avenue) - Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment Planner Shann Finwall presented the staff report regarding the request for amendment to the comprehensive sign plan. Todd Balsiger of Steiner Development, the broker for these two properties, presented samples of the sign proposal to the board. Mr. Balsiger said the wall signs for Building Two will be to the left or right of the entry door and if a tenant should have two bays there will be just one sign located over the main entry. Mr. Balsiger showed the board color samples and said the signage colors for Building Two will be an anodized brown and cream with the lettering color matching the existing lettering. Mr. Balsiger said the applicant has been working to develop building standards for signage for these two buildings and this request is the last step of that process. Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-13-2007 2 Steve Holbert of Steiner Development said that no funds were budgeted for bricking the lower section of Business Center One signage if the Auto Glass Specialist sign is removed, so it will remain without brick as it is now. Mr. Holbert explained that the brick on the free-standing sign on Building Two matches the brick on that building, but Building One does not have a brick fascia. Mr. Holbert explained that the business centers are addressed differently and would make it much more difficult to list suite number addresses on the free-standing sign for Business Center One. The board discussed with the applicant the existing addressing on the buildings. Board member Olson said she is not opposed to this request by ReUse Center to have its own identity since it is a retail use and open to the public. Board member Wise questioned whether the board needs to limit this to cabinet style signage or whether the tenant should have the choice of signage type. Mr. Balsiger said that it is the applicant's intent to have building signage that not only meets with city compliance, but allow for a variation of signage on the building for the ReUse tenant only. Mr. Balsiger said that it would be helpful to have that flexibility in the future on a case-by-case basis, but that at this time they want tenants to use the building standards signage. Board member Wise moved the community design review board recommend approval of the comprehensive sign plan amendment for Maplewood Business Center Nos. 1 and 2 located at 1616 and 1730 Gervais Avenue as follows (changes made by the CDRB are underlined if added and stricken if deleted): Maplewood Business Center No.1 (1730 Gervais Avenue): 1. Wall sign locations shall be limited to the corners of the building on the north and south elevations and above the loading dock doors on the interior of the buildings. 2. Sign content is limited to tenant identification and logos or trademarks. 3. Signs on the north and south elevations shall be non-illuminated cabinet style signs which are 48 inches by 120 inches. Letter color shall be white with a blue background. The ReUse Center or any future similar tenant located at 1719-1731 Highway 36 may be allowed one individual channel letter and logo, internally illuminated wall sign (logo 58-inches high and letters 24-inches high) or a cabinet siqn as specified above to be located on the south elevation. 4. Signs above the loading dock doors shall include the tenant address and name of the tenant. Signs shall be 1 foot x 2 feet. 5. One 6-foot tall x 12-foot wide, non-illuminated, freestanding sign to be located along Gervais Avenue advertising the center. 6. Business logos, as well as additional identity, may be located on the glass entry door to each unit. 7. City staff may approve minor changes to the comprehensive sign plan. Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-13-2007 3 Maplewood Business Center No.2 (1616 Gervais Avenue): 1. Wall sign locations shall be contoroa located on the copper fascia above each entry door on the north, south and east elevations. Wall signs to be non-illuminated cabinet-style signs (32-inches high x 6-feet wide.) 2. Business logos, as well as additional identification, may be located on the glass entry door to each unit. 3. Rear identity shall be located above the rear shipping doors to each unit, shall consist of individual letters 6 inches in height, and shall identify the company or companies receiving deliveries at each shopping door. Letters shall be placed on bronze background plates 12- inches in height times the necessary length. Similar identity may be located alongside the recessed entry to the rear entry doors. 4. One 6-foot tall x 12-foot wide, non-illuminated, freestanding sign to be located along Gervais Avenue advertising the center. 5. City staff may approve minor changes to the comprehensive sign plan. Board member Olson seconded and offered a friendly amendment to change "centered" to "located" in the first sentence in condition one of Maplewood Business Center No.2. The friendly amendment was accepted. The board voted: Ayes - all The motion passed. The board took a five-minute recess. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS None IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Sign Code Amendments 1) Dynamic Display Signs Planner Finwall presented the history and details of the dynamic display sign and gave examples of sign code amendments some cities in the metropolitan area have adopted dealing with dynamic display signs. The board discussed the number of dynamic display signs allowed under the city's settlement agreement with Clear Channel. Board member Olson said she believes the reason Rebecca Cave showed so poorly in the election for city council was that she voted to approve this settlement with Clear Channel Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-13-2007 4 disregarding disapproving comments by the community and other committee members. Ms. Olson said if this settlement agreement is not firm and binding she would like to see it amended; if it is firm and binding she would like to require stronger language in the sign code that requires the removal of a minimum of two existing signs for every dynamic sign that is installed, that the sign requires community messages displayed, and also that any message displayed on the community center sign can also be displayed on the Myth's or Clear Channel's signs since they will be public service messages. Board member Wise referred to the direct correlation noted in the sign study of the brightness of the sign as it pertains to public safety. Board member Wise said his main concerns with dynamic signs are location, size and brightness. Ms. Finwall noted the sections of the sign codes for the cities of Eagan and Minnetonka that pertain to automatic monitoring and adjustment of the brightness of these signs. Mr. Wise said he is more concerned with controlling how bright these signs are allowed to be and where they are located. City council member Will Rossbach was present at the meeting and commented on the Clear Channel settlement. Board member Demko noted the city of Eagan's sign code section on incentives that shows a reduction in signs and questioned whether Clear Channel will need to abide by that. Ms. Finwall responded that it would give the company the option for either Incentive One or Incentive Two. Mr. Demko said he would like to see a mandatory reduction of sign surface. Tom McCarver of Clear Channel said he had recently been in Disney Land so he has lost track of the process, but believes the settlement agreement has been codified and is binding. Mr. McCarver said the settlement agreement encompasses four total dynamic signs: one new sign added to the existing sign and two back-to-back signs on Highway 36 and White Bear Avenue. Mr. McCarver said the height increase requirement for the 1-494 sign is to raise it above the existing on-premise signs for better visibility. The board discussed tabling this issue to allow time to further review the information and requested a copy of the city of St. Paul's proposed ordinance. Board member Wise requested information on the current as-builts, locations, sizes, etc., of signs in Maplewood to help in analyzing and calculating square footage and a copy of any studies done on lumens. Board member Wise moved to table sign code amendments for dynamic display signs. Board member Olson seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all b. March 1, 2006 Draft Sign Code Board member Wise moved to table the March 1, 2006 draft sign code. Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-13-2007 5 Board member Demko seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all x. ADJOURNMENT Board member Wise moved adjournment of the meeting. Board member Demko seconded Ayes - all The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m.