Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/22/2003AGENDA MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD July 22, 2003 6:00 P.M. Maplewood Room - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 10. Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Agenda Approval of the July 8, 2003 Minutes Unfinished Business: None Scheduled Design Review: a. Imprint Enterprises - Gervais Avenue b. Maplewood Office Park - County Road D c. Hillcrest Redevelopment Area - Mixed-Use Zoning Discussion (Design Guidelines) Visitor Presentations: None Scheduled Board Presentations Staff Presentations: a. Craig Jorgenson Resolution of Appreciation b. Community Design Review Board Representation for the August 11, 2003, City Council Meeting. Adjourn II. III. IV. VI. MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MAPLEWOOD ROOM TUESDAY, JULY 22, 2003 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:07 p.m. ROLL CALL Matt Ledvina Diana Longrie-Kline Linda Olson Ananth Shankar Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Shankar moved to approve the agenda. Board member Olson seconded. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the CDRB minutes for July 8, 2003. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar Board member Longrie-Kline moved approval of the minutes of July 8, 2003. Ayes---Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar Board member Olson seconded. The motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. DESIGN REVIEW a, Imprint Enterprises - Gervais Avenue Ms. Finwall said Peter McGurran is proposing to develop a 10,137-square-foot office/warehouse building for Imprint Enterprises. If approved, the applicant would construct the building on a 2.97-acre vacant lot on the north side of Gervais Avenue, just west of English Street. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 2 Board member Longrie-Kline asked if the applicant knows how many square feet the future building expansion would be? She said the parking is sufficient for the 10,137-square foot building but she asked if it would be sufficient after the future expansion is built? Ms. Finwall said the applicant could address that question. Board member Olson said page 5 of the staff report states this approval does not include the parking lot addition on the east end of the proposed parking lot. She asked where the applicant intends to put the parking lot addition? Board member Shankar said he understood the board was not approving the parking lot addition or the future building expansion but he did not see the building addition listed as an item for future approval. Ms. Finwall said she didn't see that in the report either. She said there should be an added condition stating there shall be no approval for the building or parking addition. Board member Shankar said he noticed on the plans that the future building expansion extends into the 30-foot setback. Ms. Finwall said the building addition would meet the 30-foot setback. She believes Board member Shankar is referring to the 30-foot side yard setback incorrectly noted on the plans. The only required side yard setback is a 5-foot setback for the driveway and parking lot, which the applicants are meeting. Board member Olson asked if the one handicapped parking space met the code on the parking lot plan? Ms. Finwall said the ADA would require one handicap stall per 25 parking spaces, requiring this proposal to have two handicapped parking spaces. Board member Shankar asked where the handicap accessible parking space would go? Ms. Finwall said there could be a condition added regarding the revision of the site plan to show handicap accessibility spaces according to ADA requirements. Board member Shankar said he thought the ADA requirement was to have a parking stall that is van accessible, which would mean they need striping eight feet wide on the side of one handicap stall. Ms. Finwall said correct. Chairperson Ledvina asked why there was a condition for a retaining wall? Ms. Finwall said she did not see a retaining wall depicted on the grading plan but perhaps Mr. Roberts added the retaining wall condition because of the grade that may have changed on the plans. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 Chairperson Ledvina said he noticed on the grading plan that there is grading to the west off the property, which typically would require grading easements. Ms. Finwall said she noticed the engineering department did not catch that if that was the case. A temporary grading easement would be required. Board member Olson asked where the trash enclosure would be located and how it would be screened? Ms. Finwall said Mr. Roberts added a condition regarding the construction of a trash enclosure, which would have to be screened. She said the applicant could discuss their plans for a trash enclosure. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Jim Kellison, Kelco Realestate Development Services, 7300 Hudson Boulevard N., Suite 245, Oakdale, addressed the board. Mr. Kellison said indeed one more handicap accessible parking space on the plans but another handicap parking space is required and they will add it to the site plan. He said there is no need for a trash enclosure because the trash will be contained inside the building. No screening is needed because the trash container will be rolled out from inside the building. Mr. Kellison said an architect error was made on the plans and no 30-foot side yard setback is needed. He said there is also no retaining wall required for this project because all the grading will be natural on the site. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant if they had any concerns relating to the conditions outlined in the staff report? Mr. Kellison said the only concern he had was the requirement for a rainwater garden. He said a rainwater garden is not a code requirement. He said in purchasing this property they were aware that the property is bordered by a large wetland, which is a benefit for the drainage on the property. Board member Olson asked if the applicant intended to keep the spillway shown on the grading plan? Mr. Kellison said the Watershed district are requiring that they don't spillway the area, but pipe it to a close location, which would then cross over natural turf before going into the pond, allowing for infiltration. Board member Olson asked if the green trim on the building would be an aluminum product? Mr. Kellison said the trim is a dark green prefinished aluminum and would match the mullions. Board member Olson asked if there would be any fire hydrants on the property? Mr. Kellison said no but there is a fire hydrant on the street. A fire hydrant should be no more than 350 feet from the building and the hydrant located on the street is closer than 350 feet. Chairperson Ledvina asked if there would be any window tinting? Community Design Review Board 4 Minutes 7-22-2003 Mr. Kellison said there would be a light bronze tint to the windows. Board member Olson asked staff if the proposed landscaping met the city requirements? Ms. Finwall said the city's landscaping requirements are vague, leaving room for interpretation by the board. Board member Olson said she thought the landscaping was sparse on the street side. Board members agreed some additional landscaping should be added on the street side and also that the rainwater garden was not necessary and should be eliminated from the plans. Board member Longrie-Kline said she thinks the plans and overall design are very pleasing and this building would work very well in this location. Board member Longrie-Kline moved to approve the plans date-stamped June 25, 2003, and the revised buildin.q elevations presented at the July 22, 2003, community design review board meeting for the proposed Imprint Enterprises building on the north side of Gervais Avenue, west of English Street. This approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the city issues a grading permit or a building permit: a.* Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, and driveway and parking lot plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. These shall include the normal water elevation and 100-year high water elevation. (b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. The ponds or basins shall meet the city's design standards and shall include best management practices aP~,-r.a~wate~ ,-,~r,~,,,~. wherever practical. (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" native vegetation rather than using sod or grass. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 (e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city, (f) Show as little disturbance as possible on the north and east sides of the site (near the wetland and buffer area) to minimize the loss or removal of natural vegetation. This is to keep and protect as many of the trees along the north and east property lines as possible. (g) Supply the city with proof of a temporary grading easement for grading onto the vacant lot to the west; and/or obtain all necessary permits for the import or export of soil from the vacant lot to the west. (3) All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter. (4) The driveways shall meet the following standards: 24-foot width--no parking on either side and 28-foot width--parking on one side The developer or contractor shall post the driveways with no parking signs to meet the above-listed standards. (5) The developer shall disturb as little as possible of the area along the north and east property lines. Change the grading plan for this part of the site as recommended by the city engineer. (6) A storm water management plan, including drainage and ponding calculations, for the proposal. (7) Make all the changes and meet all the conditions noted by the city engineer in the memo dated July 14, 2003. b. Submit a lawn-irrigation plan to staff showing the location of sprinkler heads. c. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction. d. Submit a revised landscape plan for city staff approval showing: (1) As much of the existing vegetation (including large trees) remaining along the northern and eastern property lines (near the wetland and buffer area) as possible. (2) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. This shall include planting (instead of sodding) the disturbed areas on the south side of the parking lot around the storm water pond with native grasses and native flowering plants. The native grasses and flowering plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance. This is to reduce maintenance costs and to reduce the temptation of mowers to encroach into the pond. Specifically, the developer shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 6 (3) The planting of native grasses, flowering plants and Iow-level shrubs around the proposed storm water pond. These materials shall extend at least four feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the pond. (5) The location of all large trees on the site. (7) An increase diameter to burlapped. in the sizes of the Norway Maple trees from 21/2 caliper inches in diameter. These trees 11/2-caliper inches in shall be balled and (8) In-ground lawn irrigation system for all new landscaping, ~'""""~;"'",.,---,,-,,~,,,u (9) An increase in landscape material includinq trees and shrubs alon,q Gervais Avenue· e. Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district and install all curb cut spillways per the watershed district requirements and approvals. The fire chief shall approve the access to the back (north side) of the building for firefighting needs. Submit plans for city staff approval for any outdoor trash or recycling containers and enclosures. If the developer wants to build such facilities, the enclosure shall have materials that are compatible with the building, and they shall have gates that are 100 percent opaque. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant will submit a letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. This approval does not include the parking lot addition on the east end of the proposed parking lot or the buildinq addition located on the west side of the buildin,q. The developer or builder shall submit all necessary plans to city staff for their approval before the city may issue a permit for this part of the project. jo Submit a revised mechanical plan showing no mechanical equipment located within 20 feet of the south parapet wall. k. Submit a revised site plan showing the size and location of handicap accessible parking stalls as required by the American with Disabilities Act. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: a. Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Install a handicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space and an address on the building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs within the site, as required by staff. d. Construct a trash enclosure to meet code requirements, unless trash dumpsters are stored indoors. Any such enclosure must match the materials and colors of the building. e. Install continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways. Install and maintain an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all new landscaped areas~ g. Paint any rooftop mechanical equipment to match the uppermost part of the building. (code requirement) Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties. i. The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. (2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. (3) Remove any debris or junk from the site. (4) Install city-approved wetland signs at the edge of the wetland buffer that specify that no building, mowing, cutting, filling, grading or dumping is allowed in the buffer area. (5) Install all required landscaping. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required exterior improvements. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spring or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. 5. This approval does not include signage. All proposed signs must comply with the city's sign ordinance and the applicant must obtain all required sign permits before installation. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Chairperson Ledvina made a friendly amendment that the applicant shall obtain appropriate grading easements and or permits from the city for import or export of material from the site. Another friendly amendment is that no curb cuts, spillways for hard surface areas are allowed as indicated on the plan and modifications shall be made according to the Watershed District requirements. Board member Shankar made a friendly amendment to amend 3. g. to say no mechanical unit shall be installed within 20 feet of the parapet wall. The friendly amendments presented were acceptable to the motioners. The motion passed. b. Maplewood Office Park - County Road D Ms. Finwall said Mr. Mark Gossman is proposing to build a 9 building, 45,000-square-foot building complex east of First Financial office building at 2035 County Road D. The proposed buildings would have an exterior of horizontal lap and shake siding with asphalt-shingle roofs. The board had no questions for staff. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Mark Gossman, Vice President St. Croix Development Group, LLC, 1825 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, addressed the board. Mr. Gossman gave a presentation for the proposal to the board. He said this proposal is designed to look and feel like residential. He said them are 3 units per building and the units are sold individually to small business owners such as attorneys and accountants. He said an association would maintain the grounds of this development. Mr. Gossman said they recently built a similar development in Little Canada, which had allowed for 7 parking spaces per unit. This development is proposed to have 10 parking spaces allowed per unit. Because the owners of these individual units would be spending a lot of time in their offices the pond is set in the center of the development for people to look out and enjoy the scenery. Mr. Gossman said the building exteriors would have James Hardie siding, stone features and will be very attractive buildings. Board member Olson asked if there would be patios or benches outside that would be available for the tenants to enjoy? Community Design Review Board 9 Minutes 7-22-2003 Mr. Gossman said no. Board member Olson asked if there would be a walking path around the pond? Mr. Gossman said no. Board member Longrie-Kline said since the association would be maintaining the grounds she assumed there would be some type of maintenance agreement between them and the tenants for the care for the grounds and the pond? Mr. Gossman said yes the association would be responsible for the upkeep of the building, grounds and the pond. Board member Longrie-Kline asked how long the contract would run? Mr. Gossman said the contract is perpetual and would be a contract for as long as the building existed on the property. He said when a tenant buys a unit they have a common interest in the property and are part of the association agreement. Board member Shankar asked if the bump out depicted on the site plan represented where the entrance to the building was? Mr. Gossman said yes. Board member Shankar asked if the bump outs on the back represented back doors on the buildings? Mr. Gossman said no there are no doors off the back of the buildings. Board member Olson asked if these buildings have a second story? Mr. Gossman said yes there is a second story in the unit. The owner has the option to use the space or lease the space out to another tenant. Chairperson Ledvina asked if someone could take up residence in the second level? Mr. Gossman said no it is strictly for office use only. Board member Olson asked where the utility meters would be located? Mr. Gossman said the utility meters would be located on the sides of the buildings on the outside interior wall. Board member Olson asked what kind of a retaining wall they would be using? Mr. Gossman said they would use boulders to create a retaining wall. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to describe the stone that would be used on the front exterior of the buildings. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 Mr. Gossman said they are using a ledge stone product that would be constructed just below the windows. Mr. Gossman provided a sample board with the proposed colors to be used for this project. Board member Olson said the sample colors for the windows; trim and siding color appear very close in color. Mr. Gossman said the colors are not exact and the lighting may cause the shades to look different. He said they would provide a final color rendering for staff approval. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the buildings would be the same color? Mr. Gossman said yes. Chairperson Ledvina asked if they had considered alternating the colors of the buildings to break things up? Mr. Gossman said they've tried using different colors in the past on other residential developments products and in his opinion it doesn't have the clean and crisp appearance as constructing buildings with the same color. Board member Olson asked if they are going to have a monument sign at the location? Mr. Gossman said they would have one monument sign which would list the name of the development and the address range. Each individual unit would have a door sign with the tenant name and unit number. The wording and numbering on each unit of the building would have to be consistent because the property would have strict covenants. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant what the minimum number of parking stalls they could construct? Mr. Gossman said he doesn't want to go under what is recommended by the code, which is 225 parking spaces for this proposal. Mr. Gossman said if they reduced the parking by 43 parking spaces they could increase the amount of green space in certain areas of the proposal. Chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant if he had any concerns regarding the staff report and the conditions as they are outlined in the report? Mr. Gossman said no he did not. Board member Longrie-Kline said she would like to see a more contrasting color used on the trim of the buildings that would work well with the other colors being used. She said this way the windows, trim and siding colors won't blend together so much. She thinks this would be a nice development and she said she is sure businesses will want to relocate to this development as part of the professional community. Board member Olson said she would agree with the statements made by Board member Longrie-Kline. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 Mr. Gossman said he would agree with having a more contrasting color on the trim. Chairperson Ledvina said he agrees with the previous statements made and he also thinks the ledge stone will be an excellent addition to the building elevation. Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date-stamped June 26, 2003, for the proposed Maplewood Office Park for the site east of the property at 2035 County Road D East. Approval is based on the findings required by the code and is subject to the following conditions (changes from the original conditions by the community design review board are stricken if deleted and underlined if added): 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the city issues a grading permit or a building permit: a. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, and driveway and parking lot plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. These shall include the normal water elevation and 100-year high water elevation. (b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. The ponds or basins shall meet the city's design standards and shall include best management practices and rainwater gardens wherever practical. (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" native vegetation rather than using sod or grass. (e) Show as little disturbance as possible on the north and east sides of the site (near the freeway and ponding area) to minimize the loss or removal of natural vegetation. This is to keep and protect as many of the trees along the north and east property lines as possible. (3) All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter. The applicant shall ensure that the driveway for the site lines up with the driveway for the town houses across County Road D. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 (4) A storm water management plans, including drainage and ponding calculations, for the proposal. (5) Make all the changes and meet all the conditions noted by the city engineer in the memo dated July 14, 2003. b. Submit a lawn-irrigation plan to staff showing the location of sprinkler heads. c. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction. d. Submit a revised landscape plan for city staff approval showing: (1) As much of the existing vegetation (including large trees) remaining along the northern and eastern property lines (near the freeway and the ponding area) as possible. (2) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. This shall include planting (instead of sodding) the area around the storm water pond with native grasses and native flowering plants. The native grasses and flowering plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance. This is to reduce maintenance costs and to reduce the temptation of mowers to encroach into the pond. Specifically, the developer shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate. (3) The planting of native grasses, flowering plants and Iow-level shrubs around the proposed storm water pond. These materials shall extend at least four feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the pond. (4) The planting details (including flowering plants and shrubs) for the ponding area and for any rainwater gardens on the site. (5) At least 13 additional trees to meet the city's tree replacement requirements. e. Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district and from the MPCA. Submit a revised site plan for staff approval that shows the following: that adds more handicap-accessible parking spaces to meet ADA requirements; aad-tha-t shows that the driveway will line up with the driveway for the town houses across County Road D; and shows parking stalls not to exceed 225 in number with added green space on the southeast, southwest, and northwest corners of the parking lot. Submit plans for city staff approval for any outdoor trash or recycling containers and enclosures. If the developer wants to build such facilities, the enclosure shall have materials that are compatible with the buildings, and they shall have gates that are 100 percent opaque. h. Submit a letter of credit or cash escrow to the city for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 i. Combine the two properties into one site for tax and identification purposes. j. Get demolition permits from the city for the houses and structures on the properties. k. Cap and seal any wells on the property. Submit revised building elevations and samples to staff prior to issuance of a buildinq permit that shows the followinq: a ledgestone wainscoting around all elevations, or with at least a 5-foot wraparound to the sides; trim with a contrasting color from the rest of the building; and any exterior wall mounted meters located on interior sides of the buildings. m. Submit association documents to be approved by staff prior to issuance of a building permit and proof of recording with the county prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the buildings: a. Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. b. Sod all turf areas, including the boulevard, except the ponding area and planting beds if a different ground cover or mulch is to be used. Co Install a reflectorized stop sign at the exit, a handicap-parking sign for each handicap- parking space and an address on each building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs within the site, as required by staff. d. Construct trash enclosures to meet code requirements, unless trash dumpsters are stored indoors. Any such enclosures must match the materials and colors of the building. e. Install continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways. Install and maintain an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all new landscaped areas, excluding landscaping within any rainwater gardens and within the ponding area. Paint any rooftop mechanical equipment to match the uppermost part of the building. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent property. (code requirement) Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties. i. The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. (2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 14 (3) Remove any debris or junk from the site. (4) Install all landscaping before occupying the buildings. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spring or summer. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. 5. Signs are not approved in this review. The applicant must submit the sign plans to staff for approval and obtain the necessary sign permits. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar Board member Longrie-Kline made a friendly amendment to have the association and common area maintenance documents in place and recorded in Ramsey County prior to the city issuing building permits. Board member Olson made a friendly amendment to add 13 trees to the revised landscaping plan. The friendly amendments were acceptable to the motioners. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on August 11,2003. c. Hillcrest Redevelopment Area- Mixed-Use Zoning Discussion (Design Guidelines) Ms. Finwall said city staff is receiving comments and guidance from the planning commission and community design review board (CDRB) on the drafting of a new zoning district called the mixed-use zoning district. Upon rezoning of the Hillcrest Village redevelopment area, or other future redevelopment areas, the city may wish to implement detailed architectural guidelines. Ms. Finwall said staff recommends that the CDRB offer comments and guidance on the building design guidelines proposed within the Hillcrest Village redevelopment area. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 15 Ms. Finwall said staff would use this feedback to draft a new mixed-use zoning district for the Hillcrest Village redevelopment area, as well as other redevelopment sites within the city. Board members discussed the element of requiring brick extending or wrapping around buildings and the reasoning behind that requirement made for building elevations. Ms. Finwall said that was proposed by Calthorpe in the Hillcrest Village Urban Design Standards and they propose a wrap of 6 feet on the exterior walls and no wrap is necessary on an interior wall. Board member Longrie-Kline said she doesn't think the city should allow any more purple buildings such as the Boca Chica Taco House restaurant. She believes the character of the neighborhood should be looked at and if that is the character they are interested in then a purple building may be fine. Otherwise, the bold color of the building stands out too much. Board member Shankar said in cities like Miami Beach Florida those bold and bright colors are necessary to represent the character of the area in order to fit in appropriately. Board member Longrie-Kline said those colors are part of the architectural compatibility of the city of Miami as well. Chairperson Ledvina said there is a Calthorpe redevelopment book, which provides guidance on these details. He wondered to what extent the city could reference this book in the ordinance? Can the city incorporate the book into an intent statement for this section? If somebody said they want to build a development in a neighborhood and they said they read the ordinance but were unsure of what the city wanted the development to look like he said he would refer them to look at the Calthorpe book. Ms. Finwall said she would get Board member Longrie-Kline a copy of the Calthorpe design book. Board member Olson asked when the moratorium expired? Ms. Finwall said the moratorium expires on October 27, 2003. She said Commissioner Jackie Monahan-Junek is working with her to find the best approach to get the neighbors and businesses involved with the Hillcrest Redevelopment Plan prior to it going to the city council meeting. Board member Longrie-Kline said she had some opinions regarding awnings on page 2 e. in the staff report. She believes awnings need to be maintained and a mechanism in place to ensure that the awnings are maintained or if not they need to be fixed or replaced within a certain period of time. She would also want to clarify that they are cloth awnings not metal awnings because metal awnings are not very attractive. Board member Olson said regarding minimum door and window openings on page 3, they should have a minimum size for handicap accessibility. She said many older buildings are not handicap accessible. Ms. Finwall said that would be covered by the building code and ADA code. Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 VII. VIII. IX. Chairperson Ledvina asked if the city could incorporate illustrated examples? Ms. Finwall said yes but it is a matter of staff time and meeting the October deadline but she agrees that illustrations are nice. Chairperson Ledvina felt the illustrations in the report are very helpful in letting people know what the city would be looking for or as part of the intent statement. Board member Olson said she had a question from page 4, item d, regarding porches. She asked if someone wanted to put a porch on the side of their house, would back porches be excluded from this? Board member Longrie-Kline said she liked the statement made on page 4, item 3, and she thinks that item should be underlined because it reinforces what the board has been doing all along. Board member Olson said on page 6, item d, regarding flat roofs, she asked if flat roofs were prohibited in Maplewood? She said she has a flat roof and would like to prohibit flat roofs for residential homes to eliminate future roofing issues such as roof pitch and drainage problems. Board member Longrie-Kline said likes the statement on page 6, item 2 b., regarding buildings containing office and retail uses and window coverage. Ms. Finwall said Calthorpe recommended 70% window coverage and St. Paul proposed 50% of the length and at least 30% of the area for window coverage. Board member Olson suggested to staff that they print the language but not to print the pictures. Pictures give people ideas of how to build things and do not bring new ideas to the city. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors present. BOARD PRESENTATIONS None. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a, Craig Jorgenson Resolution of Appreciation Board member Shankar moved to approve the Jorgenson. Board member Olson seconded. resolution of appreciation for Craig Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar Community Design Review Board Minutes 7-22-2003 17 Board member Longrie-Kline will be the CDRB representative at the August 11, 2003, city council meeting. The only CDRB item for discussion will be the Maplewood Office Park on County Road D. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:22 p.m.