Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/08/20022. 3. 4. 5. 6. 10. AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD October 8, 2002 6:00 P.M. Maplewood City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Agenda Approval of the August 27, 2002 Minutes Unfinished Business: Design Review: a. Jiffy Lube - Maplewood Mall Ring Road (Old Pizza Hut Site) b. Quality Restoration - 1160 Frost Avenue c. Maplewood Imports - Gervais Avenue, West of English Street Visitor Presentations Board Presentations: a. Sustainable Building Design (Chair Ledvina) Staff Presentations: a. Schedule the Cable Casting of the Community Design Review Board Meetings b. Hillcrest Village Redevelopment Area c. Community Design Review Board Representation for the October 28, 2002 City Council Meeting Adjourn II. III. IV. MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2002 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Matt Ledvina Craig Jorgenson Diana Longrie-Kline Linda Olson Ananth Shankar Staff Present: Present Present Absent Present Present Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary APPROVALOFAGENDA Board member Jorgenson moved to approve the agenda. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - All The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for August 27, 2002. Board member OIson had a correction on page 3 in the second paragraph. Remove the word that after the word area. It should say Dr. Bouthilet said the bioretention area is marked on the plans. Board member Shankar moved approval of the minutes of August 27, 2002 with the amended changes. Board member Olson seconded. The motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. Ayes -All Abstention - Jorgenson Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 2 VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Jiffy Lube - Maplewood Mall Ring Road (old Pizza Hut site) Ms. Finwall said Mr. Jim Lee, of RJ Marco Construction is proposing to build a 3-stall Jiffy Lube auto service facility on the ring road northeast of Maplewood Mall. There is now a vacant Pizza Hut restaurant on the proposed site. If the city approves this proposal, the applicant would tear down the existing restaurant on the site and construct the new facility. Board member Shankar had a correction to be made in 2. a. (2). The direction should be south and west sides instead of north and east sides of the ring road. Chairperson Ledvina said it appears the building is very close to the street on the west side. He asked staff what the required setback is. He said the building appears to be 15 to 20 feet from the curb. Ms. Finwall said the minimum front yard setback for the business commercial zoning district is 30 feet. However, because this is a private street there is no required setback. Board member Olson said the site plan shows the setback as 18.4 feet. She asked staff what the reason for this was. Ms. Finwall said she assumes that the applicant for Jiffy Lube is attempting to maintain the parking area for Acapulco Restaurant by constructing the building with the existing setback of the old Pizza Hut building. Board member Olson asked if there is shared parking for the two buildings. Ms. Finwall said this is one parcel under one ownership. Chairperson Ledvina asked staff why the city would not use the standard setback regardless if it were a public or private road. Ms. Finwall said not having the background on this case she is assuming that staff is attempting to accommodate the existing parking for this site by recommending approval of the 18-foot front yard setback. The city code does not require that they maintain a 30-foot setback, however, that is something the board could recommend. It is not a requirement of the city ordinance. It does appear that when a sidewalk is added there will be limited space between the building and the street. Board member Olson said that is a very heavily used road. This could be a hazard having the building so close. Ms. Finwall said if you were to relocate the building an additional 12 feet to maintain the 30- foot setback you would remove the middle row of parking for the Acapulco Restaurant. She said the parking lot could be redesigned as well. Chairperson Ledvina said Jiffy Lube's site plan seems to be poorly utilized for the space that is there. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 Board member Olson said if she was to bring her vehicle to the proposed Jiffy Lube and it was going to be there for a while, she would want to walk across the street and look at some of the shops. She thinks pedestrian access and the sidewalk are important. Therefore, she would prefer to see a more reasonable setback for the building from the roadway. Chairperson Ledvina asked if staff recommended improving the quality of the brick on two elevations? Ms. Finwall said the recommendation is 50% brick on all four elevations. Board member Shankar said currently the elevations show concrete block at 65% of the building and the metal panels are at 35%. He said to have 50% of the elevations with brick it would still leave some block. He would suggest that wherever block is shown it should be changed to brick then it would be 65%. Reg Plowman with RJ Marco, 75 West Viking Drive, Little Canada representing the applicant for Jiffy Lube addressed the board. Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Plowman if he had samples of the building products and color schemes he would be using. Mr. Plowman said no, but he did bring a photo of a project RJ Marco did for Jiffy Lube about four years ago as he passed the photo out to board members. Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Plowman if this is what the proposed building will look like. Mr. Plowman said no, but the picture shows the building with 50% brick and other materials. This is what the City of Blaine requested from them. Regarding Mr. Shankar's comments to come up with the 50% brick, the panel on the building proposed is 5'4" and that leaves just under 10 feet for the balance. When the staff calculates the 50%, are they taking it from the fascia to the ground or from the whole side of the building? If you take the whole side of the building from 15 foot to the ground then he would have to put three-to-four courses of colored rock face on the lower band and the rest would be brick, and that would meet the 50%. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant for a clarification of how the building was laid out on the site. Mr. Plowman said they wanted to use the existing footprint of the Pizza Hut building. They started with the same setback to ring road. The parking is quite tight, the area that is not shown on the map is all striped parking and at night Acapulco restaurant has every one of those parking spots filled up. The client is just trying to make use of the building. It has been sitting vacant for a couple years unoccupied and he has a user that is willing to put up a lot of money to make use of the space that does not require a lot of parking. Board member Jorgenson asked Mr. Plowman to talk about the bollards that will be on the site. Mr. Plowman said the bollards will be in front of the customer parking. They are 4-inch bollards on either side of the door and stand about 4-foot high. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 4 Chairperson Ledvina said Mr. Plowman voiced his concern about the sidewalks but did he have any other concerns he wanted to discuss. Mr. Plowman said Mr. Schuette from Azure Properties was at the Planning Commission meeting and he said he is okay with the sidewalks as long as they are assured that the sidewalk complies with the city's master plan of sidewalks. Ms. Finwall said the City of Maplewood is currently working on a comprehensive sidewalk plan for the entire city. In addition, sidewalk implementation is discussed in the comprehensive plan. Board member Olson said the city is handling sidewalks on an individual basis and they have to start somewhere. Mr. Plowman suggested some type of brick detail to add visual design elements on the west wall. Board member Olson asked Mr. Plowman if there was a reason they could not relocate the building footprint to create a 20-foot setback and then add an additional parking space to the north side. Mr. Plowman said there is a 24-foot-wide drive aisle from the end of those parking spaces. However many feet forward the building is moved you are taking away from the next row of parking. Board member Olson said she thinks if they moved the building to give it a 20-foot setback they could shift the five parking spaces a few feet to the north. Mr. Plowman said the building would then encroach into the required 24-foot drive aisle. Chairperson Ledvina asked about sliding the building due north ten feet or so. Board member Shankar said you still wouldn't get a 20-foot setback. Mr. Plowman said there's an existing trash enclosure and an electrical transformer there. Board member Olson said she believes this site plan could be altered to give the building a 20- foot setback. Ms. Finwall asked the board if the main concern is the setback to the ring road. Board member Olson said yes she would like to push the building back more. The 18.4-foot setback bothers her. Chairperson Ledvina said it appears that the Acapulco Restaurant has a 25-foot setback to the ring road. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 Board member Shankar said he believes if the building is moved north five feet that should take care of the setback and the applicant can still work with the plan. Chairperson Ledvina said he would like to see this proposal more refined. He has a concern that there is an opportunity to fix the setback. He said if the ordinance says a 30-foot setback then that should be the starting point regardless if it is a private road or public roadway. He said the photographs of the Jiffy Lube that was built four years ago does not give a very good indication of what will be on the site. He thinks there should be as much brick on this building as possible. He would like to see materials, samples of the metal materials and the brick. He said this building is in a very visible location and it is appropriate that the building be constructed to have a high-quality finish and nothing less should be settled for as the reconstruction of this site. Board member Olson said she is glad the applicant is not going to be installing the red seamed metal panels as is depicted in the photo. She is not comfortable with the layout of the site plan and she wants to see the sidewalk installed. She is in favor of this building being built in this location and would like to see this proposal completed in one way or another. She thinks it is impractical to add a window on the west side of this building. Shelving, equipment and storage is important to the interior of the building and the window is not necessary. She has been in other Jiffy Lube buildings and the interior storage is very important and that would be taken away from the window if it were installed. Landscaping can be done to add to the exterior of the building if the window would serve no purpose. Board member Jorgenson said he would like to see as much green space as possible. He would like to see the sidewalk installed, and the footprint of the building altered. Board member Shankar said he does not believe a window should be introduced to that 30- foot wide wall either when landscaping can add more visual elements. He is hesitant to introduce two colors of brick detailing. There could be one color of brick detailing and have a soldier course that has brick stacked in a different manner at three feet off the ground. Also there are two colors of metal panels already. Board member Jorgenson said he is concerned about the northern portion of the site where the five customer parking stalls and bollards are located. It was suggested by Mr. Plowman to put in some blocking in that location. Board member Oison said she agrees. She would like to recommend extending the concrete walk and put some bushes in by the bollards to create some definition between the parking and the drive path. She said she would like to have the applicant come back with a better layout and design because she has so many concerns about this proposal. Chairperson Ledvina told staff it seems that board members have a lot of issues and concerns about this proposal. He asked staff if tabling this proposal in order to see revisions would be appropriate. Ms. Finwall said this proposal is scheduled to go to the city council on October 28, 2002. The applicant is attempting to begin construction soon after, so time is important to the applicant. However, Ms. Finwall said the board seems to be struggling with the site plan and building elevations and for this reason tabling the item would be a good idea. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 Board member Olson moved to table this item. Chairperson Ledvina said he would like to see the applicant revise the site plan to meet as many of the conditions that have been outlined in the staff report so the plans reflect the conditions as well as the board members discussion this evening. He would like to have the applicant provide samples of the building materials, color renditions of what the building would look like, the illumination of the bollards or substituting of, substituting brick for block, the south elevation using some relief to the brick construction, such as a soldier course, and a strong concern regarding the building setback in comparison to ordinance requirements which would be 30 feet. Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes - All The motion carried. b. Quality Restoration - 1160 Frost Avenue Ms. Finwall said Roger McGuire of Quality Restoration Services is requesting a conditional use permit (CUP) revision for an existing outside storage yard. This site is on the south side of Frost Avenue across from Flicek Park. Quality Restoration uses this storage facility for storing their ground restoration equipment such as trucks, trailers and earth-moving machinery. They also keep signs, sandbags and barricades on the site. Ms. Finwall said the applicant has not yet determined if they will build a permanent building on the site. If they choose to construct a permanent building, the owner must submit the architectural and site plans to the city for a revision to the CUP and to the community design review board approval (CDRB) for approval. Chairperson Ledvina asked why the city council established the sunset date for the conditional use permit. Ms. Finwall said because there was no building proposed for this site the city council wanted to ensure that the site did not expand without a permanent structure. Chairperson Ledvina wondered why the city council granted the CUP for five years and now the city is going to extend it another five years. Ms. Finwall said at the time of approval, Quality Restoration was leasing the property, and since that time they have purchased the property. Mr. Doug Yetzer, 3225 Neal Armstrong Boulevard, Eagan, addressed the board. He is a partner with Roger McGuire of Quality Restoration representing the applicant. He said they want to be a good neighbor and are willing to do anything the city would request that they do. They have no problems with any of the conditions. They have four other properties in the twin cities and they are not sure what there future plans are at this time for this location but it has served them well. Board member Olson asked the applicant if they see themselves there in five years or not. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 '7 Mr. Yetzer said he is not sure. They realize the area has redevelopment potential and they have thought about developing the property for some other use but nothing has been decided. Chairperson Ledvina felt uncomfortable with the proposal without an additional sunset date. Ms. Finwall clarified that the planning commission recommended another 5-year sunset date. Mr. Yetzer indicated that they were fine with the 5-year sunset date. Chairperson Ledvina said with the knowledge of the sunset date he has no issues with the proposal. Staff has done an excellent job with the conditions. Board member Olson agreed. She complimented staff on the identification of the knapweed and to have the condition to remove the knapweed and the Siberian elm trees on the property. Commissioner Shankar moved to approve the resolution on pages 13 and 14 of the staff report. This resolution approves a conditional use permit to allow an outdoor storage yard south of Frost Avenue, east of Edward Street (formerly 1160 Frost Avenue). The city is approving this permit based on the findings required by code, subject to the following conditions (Additions are underlined and deletions are struck-out): All construction shall follow the site plan date-stamped June 11, 1997. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year. · ,,;11,,-,-. ,-, -' ,,,,, ,-.,-, O..,-,~.,-,,.,,,,I,-,,-,,- '1 r~ I I I'~ ~.~1./I Iq,.JILrt~l If,ti Uq.,~q,,~ [t./'[.,~l I I II1, The property owner shall submit a plan for staff approval showinq the following site improvements: a. Restore the ground area north of the north fence with a ground cover. Plant screening trees to help hide the storage yard from Frost Avenue. The screenin.q should include 8-foot-tall Black Hills spruce and white cedar in sta.q.qered rows. These plantings should cover the area from the east edqe of the gate to a point about 60 feet to the east. Quality Restoration may place the screening rows near their fence or on top of the hill closer to Frost Avenue. Restore the areas of gravel and bare ground near Frost Avenue. This restoration will involve removinq the gravel and weeds within about 50 feet of Frost Avenue and restoring the areas with turf, ground cover and landscaping. d. Remove all the Siberian elm trees from the property. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 e, 8 When the city restores the open space site to the east1 Quality Restoration shall remove and eradicate the knapweed and sweet clover from their property and then restore the hillside with ground cover, landscaping and trees. The applicant or owner shall complete these improvements by June 1,2003. 4. The temporary storage of work-related materials, such as dirt piles and cable spools, for example, may be permitted. These materials may be kept on site for no more than one month. No more than 25 percent of the site shall be used for the storage of such materials. 5. Normal hours of operation shall be 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. Exceptions will be allowed to provide emergency service to customers. 6. The city council will need to approve a revision to this permit if the owner wants to put a permanent building on the site. 7. a. The applicant shall provide a permanent trash container or dumpster on the site, b. Provide screening along the south side with either a fence or live shrubbery as determined by staff, c. Provide a permanent surface to the entry drive to the fence, d. The CUP will be renewed for another five years expiring on November 1, 2007'. Ms. Finwall asked CDRB members if they wanted to add the conditions that were added by the planning commission at the October 7, 2002, meeting. The planning commission changes are in bold. CDRB members all agreed and seconded the motion. Commissioner Olson seconded the motion including the conditions in bold that were recommended by the planning commission. Ayes - All The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on October 28, 2002. c, Maplewood Imports - Gervais Avenue, West of English Street Ms. Finwall said Maplewood Imports of 2780 Highway 61 North is proposing to construct a new vehicle storage lot on a 2.36-acre parcel located on the north side of Gervais Avenue, east of S.P. Richards and west of English Street. Maplewood Imports will use the parking lot for temporary storage of new vehicles in order to alleviate the frequent excess of vehicles at their Highway 61 dealership. There is no building proposed for the site and the storage lot will have the capacity to store 278 vehicles. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 Board member Olson noticed an error in the staff report on pages 11-13. Highway 36 and Highway 61 are in the wrong places on the map. Chairperson Ledvina asked staff if it would be appropriate to add item h. indicating the engineering plan review of October 8, 2002. Ms. Finwall said yes. Mr. Jim Kellison of Kellison Company, 7300 Hudson Boulevard, Oakdale addressed the board. He is here representing the applicant and can answer the engineering, technical and construction questions for the Maplewood Imports proposal. Mr. Doug Molder the general manager for Maplewood Imports is here to answer any operational questions. They agree that there is some landscaping that is necessary around the front of the detention pond. They do have a significant issue with the requirement to have planter islands in the parking lot. There are no other parking lots or storage lots within the city that have them. Maplewood Toyota just put in a storage lot about a year ago and they don't have any planter islands in their parking lot. They have an eight-foot-high concrete block retaining wall that has no landscaping in front of it. They have 4 trees on Beam Avenue with no other landscaping whatsoever. They have a dipped vinyl fence along Beam Avenue around four feet high. Maplewood Imports wants to be accommodating but they are being asked to do things that no other dealership has had to do. He thinks they can accommodate Chris Cavett's engineering requirements without damaging the plan and the requirements that Maplewood Imports has. They are willing to put the fence in but they don't think the fence will be visually attractive to anyone. Mr. Kellison said they would like to move more shrubbery to the front where more of the public would drive by and see it. They will put 20-foot poles on top of the 2-1/2-foot barriers to meet the lighting height requirement. They will be reducing the wattage in the lighting to meet the requirements as well. It was also required to stripe all of the parking spaces. He said nobody but Maplewood Import's employees would be going onto the parking grounds and they don't feel the need to spend the money to stripe the lot. Maplewood Toyota has cars parked everywhere and don't follow the striping. As far as the fencing goes they would use a seven- foot-high vinyl dipped fence and have a gate on the front of the entrance and either have an electronically opened gate or a lock box that other companies have for the fire and police department to gain access to. Board member Jorgenson replied there is a proposed building template on the plans, when would that building be built. Mr. Kellison said there are no plans at this time. It all depends on the growth of Maplewood Imports. If they need the building there is still enough room to have the building plus the expanded parking area on the site. Board member Shankar asked Mr. Kellison how the delivery trucks would be able to maneuver around with the parking stalls so close to the turning radius. Mr. Kellison said their engineer said it will work. If they have to eliminate a few parking spaces to make it work, then that is what they will do. 1 Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 l0 Board member Olson asked Mr. Kellison how many vehicles could be stored on the lot with a complete turning radius for the trucks. Mr. Kellison said it was 278 parking spaces but with the revised retaining wall they may lose 10 to 12 parking spaces. Board member Olson asked if the applicant anticipates having the lot full of cars. Mr. Doug Molder the general manager of Maplewood Imports addressed the board. Mr. Molder said he doesn't want to have too much inventory located on the lot at one time. He feels if the front of the lot is visible with a wrought iron fence then maybe the sides of the lot should be visible as well and not enclosed. Mr. Kellison said if you drive up and down Highway 61 there is only one car dealership that has a fence enclosing their cars. The rest of the dealerships have completely open lots. People steal cars whether they are fenced in or not. Chairperson Ledvina asked what the issues were with the staff recommendation to install the wrought iron fence. Mr. Kellison said it is an unnecessary expense for what the applicant is trying to accomplish. The chain-linked fence is adequate, attractive and serves their needs. Other M-1 users in that area have been using chain-linked fences all around the area. They feel as if they are being treated differently in this regard. Board member Olson asked Mr. Kellison if having a better quality fence would enhance the image of the neighborhood? She stated that no other dealership has Porsches behind their fence. Mr. Kellison said it's just for a sense of security. If someone wants to get into the lot they will climb over a seven-foot high fence. Putting up a decorative wrought iron fence is going above and beyond what they need. If that were the case then they would just omit putting up a fence completely if they're forced into a situation of having to put the wrought iron fence up. Board member Olson asked Mr. Kellison which style and color of fence they preferred? Mr. Kellison said they prefer to put a dark green vinyl dipped chain-linked fence all the way around the property without slats in it. They are willing to listen to recommendations and carry those forward. Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Kellison if the city council required you to follow the staff recommendations and put in a wrought iron fence are you saying you would not put the fence up at all then? Mr. Kellison said that is correct, Maplewood Imports would not install any fencing then. He said he did not believe there was a requirement within the ordinance that would require them to fence that location. He said he does not know how the city could require them to fence that sight but he is not a legal expert. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 Board member Olson said the landscape islands and the striping of the parking lot is unnecessary. She would prefer the vinyl dipped chain linked fence. In her opinion the wrought iron fence is overkill. Board member Shankar said he agreed. Board member Jorgenson said he agreed also. The applicant should increase the landscaping in the front of the fencing. His only concern is the future building on the site even though that is not being discussed at this time. Chairperson Ledvina said because of the visibility of this site he thinks the fence should be constructed of a high quality material. He said because of the visual massing of the retaining wall he thinks the fence should be extended. A curve linear element should be required for the retaining wall. He would not want to see the wall built to the current design. He said regarding the temporary grading easement, there is some grading shown for Parcel C as well, so that should be included in the conditions. Board member Olson said that is an important condition because this area is going to be draining into the adjacent property. Ms. Finwall said the applicant indicated that if the city council required them to build a wrought iron fence then they would not build a fence at all. The conditional use permit is based on the site plan, which will be approved by the city council. What is approved by the city council will have to be followed in order to obtain the use for the permit. It would have to be constructed as an element of the conditional use permit. Regarding the striping of the parking lot, the applicant shows neatly striped spaces on the parking lot plan. The city's parking ordinance requires all parking lots to have a bituminous surface or concrete and single-striped-parking spaces, so the striping is a requirement of the city's parking code. Striping is very important to keep an orderly lot to ensure there are not vehicles parked in all directions on the lot. Mr. Kellison asked the chairperson if he could be heard in regards to staff's comments. Chairperson Ledvina agreed. Mr. Kellison said as far as the striping of the parking lot goes; it is a storage area not a parking lot. He said it would be very similar to what is on the back of a building where there are truck docks and they don't put striping there. He said they put the striping on the plans because they thought the city would want to see what was being proposed and approximately how many cars could be stored there. They don't see this as a parking lot they see this as a storage facility. If they move the retaining wall back it will be no higher than 4-feet high. He said it should look fine with the shrubs at the top and in the front. Board member Olson said she thinks this area has to be fenced. Wrought iron fencing will require maintenance more than a dipped vinyl fence. She asked staff if there were some compromise the city could come up with for the applicant? Ms. Finwall said her concern is the city is approving a large parking lot without any building. With that some architectural element should be added to the site. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 12 Board member Shankar asked what the aesthetic value there would be in seeing beyond the wrought iron fence and piers only to see a jumble of cars? Chairperson Ledvina said the applicant would have to park the cars in an orderly fashion to maximize the use of the lot. He sees the applicant's point that this is a storage lot and not a parking lot. Board member Olson said the applicant is clearing out a heavily wooded area and putting wall- to-wall blacktop to build this storage lot. She said there is only so much you can do to enhance the surrounding properties. Mr. Kellison asked to be recognized by the chair. Chairperson Ledvina agreed. Mr. Kellison said they don't want to be singled out. They want to be treated just like any other proposal that has come across the CDRB. They have met all the ordinances and they feel they should not have to put the fencing in or stripe the parking lot. Ms. Finwall said there are no other lots in the City of Maplewood that have a parking or storage lot separate from the dealership itself. This site "should" be singled out because the city does not have anything else like it. Board member Olson said the CDRB is not singling the applicant out. Maplewood Toyota had to go through much more than this for approval. She said the responsibility of the CDRB is to improve the quality of life in the City of Maplewood and they are dealing with a lot of generational factors of development. They have to deal with these situations on a site-by-site basis. The applicant is dealing with expensive cars and parking Porsches on a storage lot, one would think the applicant would want the cars displayed and enclosed in a high quality and safe condition. Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans (date-stamped September 26, 2002) for the storage lot located on the north side of Gervais Avenue, east of English Street (Legal Description: Lot B, W.H. Howards Garden Lots). This approval is based on the findings required by the city code. The approval shall be subject to the applicant or owner meeting the following conditions: (Deletions are struck through and changes are in bold). Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. b. The "future building" as shown on the plans is not approved at this time. c. Submit the following for staff approval before the city issues a building permit: (1) Final grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet the requirements of the city code and the city engineer. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 ]3 (2) Elevations of the proposed fence and gates. The elevation should include a 7- foot-high wrought iron fence with decorative brick columns and an electronically controlled wrought iron entry gate on the front of the property; and a 7-foot-high chain link fence with optional green slats on the sides and rear of the property. (3) Revised landscape plan to include: (a) Additional landscaping in front of the retaining wall and around the perimeter of the retention pond. Landscaping to include moisture-tolerant trees and shrubs. The retaining wall shall be curved to soften the appearance at the outside and inside corner locations, (4) Revised lighting and photometrics plan. The plan shall show that all freestanding lights do not exceed 25 feet as measured from ground grade to the top of the luminary and the maximum light illumination at all property lines and does not exceed .4 foot-candles. (5) A temporary grading easement for grading on Parcel A (Legal Description: Lot A, W.H. Howards Garden Lots and Parcel C). Sod or hydroseed Parcel A (Legal Description: Lot A, W.H. Howards Garden Lots) within 14 days of completion of grading. e. Complete the following before occupying the storage lot: (1) Install all bituminous surface and curb and gutter. (2) (3) Install the approved fence. (4) Install all required landscaping by June 1 if the storage lot is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupying the storage lot if occupied in the spring or summer. (5) Install all required exterior lights. f. 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. (2) The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. Community Design Review Board Minutes 10-8-2002 14 VII, VIII. IX. X= g. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. h. The plans shall conform to the engineering report date-stamped October 8, 2002. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - All Chairperson Ledvina added the following friendly amendments: 2. c. (5) adding Parcel C, 2. c. (3) (a) the retaining wall shall be curved to soften the appearance at the outside and inside corner locations. Board member Jorgenson made a friendly amendment adding 2. c. (2) with optional green slats on the sides and rear of the property. Board member Olson seconded the friendly amendments. Ayes - All The motion passed. This item goes to the city council October 28, 2002. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. BOARD PRESENTATIONS a. Sustainable Building Design (Chair Ledvina) Chair Ledvina tabled this item until the next meeting October 22, 2002. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Schedule the Cable Casting of the Community Design Review Board Meetings Ms. Finwall said she would notify members in the CDRB packet when the cablecast will begin. There is usually a month notice needed for the cablecast. b, Hillcrest Village Redevelopment Area Ms. Finwall said the Hillcrest Village Redevelopment Area was approved by the city council and has directed staff to continue drafting an ordinance for rezoning the property. c. Commissioner Shankar will represent the Community Design Review Board at the October 28, 2002, city council meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m.