HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/11/20032.
3.
4.
5.
o
8.
9.
10.
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
March 11, 2003
6:00 P.M.
Maplewood City Hall Council Chambem
1830 County Road B East
Call to Order
Roll Call
Approval of Agenda
Approval of the February 25, 2003 Minutes
Unfinished Business: Sibley Cove Apartment Building - South Side of County
Road D, East of White Bear Avenue and West of Ariel Street
Design Review:
a. Kohl's Department Store Building Addition - Maplewood Mall
b. Van Dyke Village Townhomes - West Side of Van Dyke Street, North
of County Road B
c. Countryside Motor's Saab Building Addition and Sales/Storage Lot
Expansion - 1180 Highway 36 East
Visitor Presentations: None Scheduled
Board Presentations
Staff Presentations
Adjourn
II.
III.
IV.
V=
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003
CALL TO ORDER
Chairpemon Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:07 p.m. because of video technical
difficulties.
ROLL CALL
Matt Ledvina
Craig Jorgenson
Diana Longrie-Kline
Linda Olson
Ananth Shankar
Staff Present:
Present
Absent
Present
Absent
Present
Shann Finwall, Associate Planner
Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Ms. Finwall said the applicant for the Van Dyke Village Townhomes would like to remove his
proposal from the agenda this evening.
Board member Shankar moved to approve the agenda with the change.
Board member Longrie-Kline seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Shankar
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of the CDRB minutes for February 25, 2003.
Board member Longrie-Kline moved to table approval of the minutes for February 25, 2003.
Both board member Longrie-Kline and board member Shankar were absent from that meeting.
Board member Shankar seconded. Ayes --- Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Shankar
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Sibley Cove Apartment Building - South side of County Road D, East of White
Bear Avenue and West of Ariel Street
Ms. Finwall said the CDRB tabled this item at the last CDRB meeting due to the concerns
regarding the design of the apartments. Mr. David Steele, representing MWF Properties, has
revised the building elevations and is now requesting design review approval for his proposed
80-unit apartment building. He is proposing this project on a 7.1-acre site on the south side of
County Road D between White Bear Avenue and Ariel Street. The project would be a 3-story
apartment building with underground parking for 100 cars. In addition, the plans show 100
surface parking spaces and 18 future parking spaces on the site.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
2
Ms. Finwall said the building would have a mix of 86 two-bedroom units and 14 three-bedroom
units and a storm shelter in the garage area of the building.
Ms. Finwall said the city council denied Mr. Steele's request for a land use change at the city
council meeting March 10, 2003. However, Mr. Steele is proceeding with his design review in
the hopes that the city council will reconsider his proposal.
Ms. Finwall said the proposed building would be attractive and would have three stories above
grade and an underground parking area. As proposed, the building would have an exterior of
face brick, horizontal cement board siding on the first floor, horizontal vinyl siding on the
second and third floors and scale shingles on the gable ends, and the roof would have asphalt
shingles. The developer has proposed a mix of building colors - primarily earth-toned rusts
and creams (red, brown and tan). Ms. Finwall said the revised elevation shows shingles on
the gable ends as opposed to the horizontal siding. The addition of french or patio doors with
metal railings on the outside of the units, 1" X 4" colored trim around the windows and doors,
and more brick on the end elevations, extending brick to the third floor elevation. The revised
plan also shows a new entry portico extending out from the front door of the building and a
door and patio out to the tot lot on the northeast side of the building. However, the proposed
plans do not show the south elevation with the underground garage door. (This building style,
with the proposed materials and colors, should be compatible with and equal in quality to the
buildings in the area, including the Birch Glen apartments.)
Ms. Finwall said the proposed landscaping plan is a good start but needs additional work. It
shows the developer planting at least 50 new, trees including red oaks, maple, ash, linden,
black hills spruce and Austrian Pine. In addition, the plans show the planting of a variety of
ornamental trees and shrubs on the site. The landscaping plans show most of the site will be
graded with the construction of the storm water pond on the southeast corner of the lot.
However, it does not show any landscaping or ground treatment in the ponding area and the
city should require the developer to provide a revised landscape plan that would include the
landscaping treatments for the ponding area and for any rainwater gardens that the developer
may be including on the site.
Ms. Finwall said the applicant provided a site lighting plan that shows the expected light spread
from the proposed parking lot lights. The proposed poles would be 20-feet tall and would have
a sharp cutoff shoebox luminary with a 250-watt high-pressure sodium light bulb. The city
code requires the light fixtures have a design that hides the bulb and lens from view. Ms.
Finwall said the applicant should revise the lighting plan in several ways. First, the plan should
show how the lighting on the building would add to the site lighting. Secondly, the plan should
have additional lighting near the driveways, where they intersect with the public streets, so
they are adequately lit. Finally, the plan should show details about the proposed light fixtures
to ensure they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view of adjacent properties to
avoid nuisances.
Ms. Finwall said staff is recommending that the developer install a six-foot-wide concrete
sidewalk on the west side of Ariel Street between the existing sidewalk north of Woodlynn
Avenue and the south property line of the daycare center. This sidewalk would provide the
residents of this building off-street pedestrian access to the shopping area and church to the
south. A sidewalk along Ariel Street also would provide a pedestrian link to existing sidewalk
along Woodlynn Avenue to the sidewalk along Ariel Street south of Woodlynn Avenue.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
Ms. Finwall said the city installed a new trail along the south side of County Road D in 2002, as
part of the County Road D reconstruction. The city needs, however, a ten-foot-wide
permanent easement along the south side of the right-of-way (on the project site) to cover the
area that the trail is on.
Ms. Finwall said this site has commercial properties on three of its sides, including an auto
repair mall to the west and strip center to the south. Staff feels it would be prudent for and
helpful to the residents of the new apartments if the developer installed screening along the
west and south sides of the project to help ensure that the new residents and their vehicles are
separated from the adjacent commercial properties. With the revised plan the developer is
showing a six-foot high wood fence to be located along the west side of the property.
However, because of an existing easement on the south side of the property the applicant told
Ms. Finwall that the easements on the south part of the property for the existing power lines
prohibit them from installing any structures or permanent improvements, except the parking lot,
in the easement area. As such, they cannot install a fence along the south property line of the
site. In addition, the developer is proposing planting gardens on the south side of the property
for the use of the tenants in the building.
Board member Shankar asked staff how the applicant intended to keep the garden properly
cared for?
Ms. Finwall said perhaps the city should address that issue in the conditional use permit (CUP)
with the applicant in the maintenance of the apartments.
Chairperson Ledvina asked if staff could comment on the split vote on this proposal that was
reviewed at the city council meeting March 10, 2003?
Ms. Finwall said she was not present at the city council meeting but she understood two of the
city council members voted against the proposed land use plan, which is required to construct
an apartment. This property is zoned business commercial as well as limited business
commercial. In order to construct the residential units, a land use change is proposed and with
that a majority vote is required. There were concerns from an adjoining property owner for
Birch Glen Apartments who expressed concerns with this proposal. The applicant is
requesting design review in the hopes that the city council will reconsider his land use plan
change in the near future.
Chairperson Ledvina asked staff if the concern is related to the land use and not in the design?
Ms. Finwall said the Mayor, who was one of the two dissenting voters, expressed concern that
the CDRB had not approved the design review yet.
Board member Longrie-Kline asked staff wasn't there a concern because of the change of
use? Her concern is the CDRB is looking at the design and determining the mechanics of the
design and then the applicant goes through the expense and the process just to find out the
project can't be done. In her opinion, you have to change the use, before you can look at or
approve the design. If the use is never going to be changed, then it doesn't matter what the
design looks like because the use is the issue.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
4
Chairperson Ledvina said the charge of the CDRB is to review the design and the city council
action should not sway them either way.
Ms. Finwall said, keep in mind the approval of the design is not approval of the project, so
even if the CDRB approves the design review tonight and the city council does not reconsider
the CUP and the land use plan change, this is where the proposal would end. Ms. Finwall said
city council member Kathleen Juenemann is in the audience and perhaps she could comment
on that.
Mr. David Steele, at 4807 Slater Court in Eagan, representing MWF Properties, addressed the
board. He said they have on-site management that would care for the property. They will
make sure the gardens are tilled and cleaned up in the fall. They have proposed to install the
rainwater gardens on the property and would be working with Chris Cavett on that. He said
they would install the eight-foot wide french balconies at a height of 48 inches instead of the
code requirement of 42 inches in height for an added safety measure. He brought color
samples to show the board of the materials they propose to use on the exterior of the building.
The competitor across the street Birch Glen has asked for a level playing field. He said Sibley
Cove Apartments are proposed at 40 feet in height at the top of the roof and Birch Glen
Apartments is 38 feet in height. If part of what he is being judged on is what is across the
street, Birch Glen has 72,000 square feet of green space verses Sibley Cove at 219,000
square feet of green space. Mr. Steele handed out photos of Birch Glen Apartments to the
board so they could compare that building with his proposal for Sibley Cove Apartments. He
feels Sibley Cove has achieved a better landscaping plan proposal, they would have more
green space, a nice garden area for the tenants, an architectural pleasing combination of
building materials dressing up the exterior of the building and he thinks the Sibley Cove
Apartment plan is comparable or maybe even better than the Birch Glen Apartments.
Board member Longrie-Kline asked the applicant what the water source would be for the
tenant gardens?
Mr. Steele said whatever Mother Nature doesn't provide to the garden, the on-site
management will sprinkle the garden. He said it is an additional service they will provide for
the tenants. You can't provide the garden and not water it and take care of it. Just like they
are going to provide a tot lot. They propose to put in a rubber mat on the tot lot to prevent
injuries to the children. This rubber mat is about 11~-inches thick and will be a cushioning for
the children unlike wood chips that used to be used on playgrounds.
Board member Shankar asked Mr. Steele if the heating and cooling units would be by heat
pump?
Mr. Steele said no the heating and cooling would be done by wall pack. The self-contained
heating and cooling unit will be located in the corner of the living room or the bedroom. It will
be dark colored, pre-finished aluminum, approximately 18 inches X 42 inches high.
Board member Shankar stated that Birch Glen Apartments doesn't have wall packs on the
exterior of their building.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
Chairperson Ledvina asked if there was anybody else in the audience that wanted to speak
regarding this proposal?
Mr. Pat Flaherty, representing Birch Glen Apartments, at 3100 Ariel Street, Maplewood,
addressed the board. He said he is opposed to this project. He was at the city council
meeting the evening of March 10, 2003. Birch Glen Apartments and its representatives are not
the only ones opposed to this proposal. There were neighboring businesses such as the Auto
Mall, the strip mall, the Emerald Inn, and people in the residential area that were also opposed
to this proposal. This land is in a commercial zone and the neighboring businesses did not
want anything but commercial property to be built there. His concerns are more in the design
itself of the building. Mr. Steele said you would barely see the rooftop of this building, but this
building would be 40 feet tall. It will look like a big wall behind the commercial buildings on
White Bear Avenue. He said it looks like Mr. Steele has done some things to improve the
design of this building but there are still no decks, no bump outs and it is still a large L-shaped
building. He doesn't see people building apartment buildings like this anymore. People build
entrances to welcome people and bump outs on the buildings. Birch Glen Apartments were
not allowed to be built as a large plain building. His company had to build a grander entrance
to welcome people, and build bump outs to break up the expansion of the building. Sibley
Cove does not have any of those elements on this proposed building design. Birch Glen
Apartments was told by the city that they had to include those elements on the design of their
building and he wants a level playing field. This building does not belong here. The Mayor
had several issues with this building and one of the major issues was the land use change.
Several neighbors saw Mr. Flaherty at the city council meeting on cable and they contacted
him by telephone today. The concern that has come out in the last day or two is that the
adjoining properties did not get notified regarding this proposal. He said the notification was
sent out to the physical property addresses and not legal property addresses. Most of the
other addresses were addressed to "Manager" at Amoco, "Manager" at Daycare Center and
not addressed to the owners. Many of these are leased buildings and the building owners may
not be agreeable to this proposal. He thinks a better attempt should have been made to notify
the people that count.
Board member Longrie-Kline was trying to clarify what Mr. Flaherty meant by "they just want a
level playing field." Did he mean he wanted the applicant for Sibley Cove to spend more
money on their building by putting more materials on the exterior of the apartment building, or
did he mean he wanted Sibley Cove to put in architectural elements like bump outs on the
building so it would look more like the design of Birch Glen Apartments?
Mr. Flaherty said a developer can spend a lot of money on exterior improvements for a building
this size but it will still look like a huge warehouse building. The expanse of this building is the
size of a football field. He thinks the applicant should be required to put the bump outs on
Sibley Cove just as Birch Glen was required to.
Mr. Flaherty said other architectural elements would be things like a welcoming entrance to the
building. With the expanded brick the applicant proposes to put on the building and other
exterior enhancements, the building still looks like one large long building and it is not broken
up in any way. He doesn't believe the Sibley Cove proposal is being held to the same
standards that the city required of Birch Glen Apartments.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
Kathleen Juenemann, city council member at the City of Maplewood, addressed the board.
The city council members that voted against this were Mary Koppen and Mayor Bob Cardinal.
The issues were the land use change and the final approved design plan. The land use plan
change was something the city could consider in this case because the city has been talking
about affordable housing and that is often used as a transition from commercial to residential.
The city is talking about mixed use in the Hartford Development at the Hajicek property and
possibly at the Hillcrest and Gladstone neighborhoods. Speaking as citizen, Kathleen
Juenemann 721 Mount Vernon, she said, in the design phase of this proposal, there seems to
be a very large difference of placement with the two buildings. Birch Glen Apartments is right
on top of the street, so to be pleasing to the eye, staff was concerned with the building design
and placement on the property. She said just as Mr. Flaherty had worked with staff for the
design of Birch Glen Apartments, Mr. Steele has been working with staff for the Sibley Cove
proposal. The Sibley Cove building would be more recessed or hidden from view in its location
with the lot so she presumes the design advice from staff had to do with the placement of the
buildings on the lots.
Chairperson Ledvina said the changes in the design of the building are pretty dramatic from
the first set of plans the board saw. He is pleased with the design changes. The prominence
of the Birch Glen building was a big issue with the placement on Ariel Street. The Sibley Cove
building does not have the same street presence that Birch Glen has. He thinks the natural
vegetation will help isolate the views of the building, especially from the east and north. It is
his opinion that the developer has listened to the board's comments as well as staff's
comments and has made most of the changes to the proposed plans.
Board member Longrie-Kline said she believes you can break up the expanse of a building
with color, texture and the use of different materials and it would have every bit of an effect on
the appearance and is just as costly as doing other architectural enhancements. She thinks
they are two different styles of buildings. There is a lot of green space around the building,
there will be revisions to the landscaping and she supports this proposal.
Chairperson Ledvina said he would like to comment that perhaps the applicant and the city
could consider the possibility of substituting the curb and gutter for the south portion of the
parking lot and use a buffer strip to enable sheet-flow drainage to the grassy area. This may
provide more of a buffering capacity for the storm water.
Board member Longrie-Kline asked staff if the city has some type of agreement regarding the
maintenance of a public garden, weeds and/or grass height?
Ms. Finwall said as far as she was aware, the city has not had a public garden within an
apartment development before, but the city could include a condition in the CUP that an
approved maintenance agreement for the public garden is agreed upon by staff and the
developer.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date-stamped J~,uc,:'y,.-,,"" .-,,,,.,"'"n" March
4, 2003, (site plan, landscape plan, grading and drainage plans and building elevations) for the
Sibley Cove Apartments. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the code.
The developer or contractor shall do the following: (changes are in bold and deletions have
a strike through them).
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:
Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These
plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, sidewalk 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" vegetation rather than
using sod or grass.
(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 daycare center) to minimize the loss or removal
of natural vegetation. This is to keep and protect as many of the
large trees along the north and east property lines (near the
daycare center) as possible.
(3) *The tree plan shall:
Community Design Review Board 8
Minutes 3-11-2003
(a) Be approved by the
removal.
city engineer before site grading or tree
(b)
Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees.
This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the
site.
(c) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits.
(d) Be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans.
(4)
The design of the storm water pond shall be subject to the approval of the
city engineer. The developer shall be responsible for getting any needed
off-site grading or drainage easements and for recording all necessary
easements.
(5)
All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb
and gutter except the south side of the parking lot where the
developer should work with the city on the possibility of substituting
curb and gutter with a buffer strip to enable sheet flow drainage.
(6) 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.
(7)
The developer shall disturb as little as possible of the area along the north
and east property lines near the daycare center, Change the grading plan
for this park of the site as recommended by the city engineer.
(8)
The developer shall install a six-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along Ariel
Street between the existing sidewalk north of Woodlynn Avenue and the
south property line of the daycare center.
(9) A storm water management plan, including drainage and ponding
calculations, for the proposal.
(10)
Make all the changes and meet all the conditions noted by the city
engineer in the memo dated February 10, 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:
Community Design Review Board 9
Minutes 3-11-2003
(1) As much of the existing vegetation (including large trees) remaining along
the northern and eastern property lines (near the daycare center) 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.
(3)
The planting of native grasses and flowering plants around the proposed
storm water pond 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
rainwater garden at the northeast corner of the building.
Submit revised building elevations to be approved by staff as follows:
(1) south elevation
(2) underground garage elevation
f. ~ Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district.
Submit a revised site lighting plan for the city staff approval. This plan shall show how
the lighting on the building would add to the site lighting, and the plan should have
additional lighting near the driveways, where they intersect the public streets, so the
driveways are adequately lit. This plan also shall show details about the proposed light
fixtures to ensure they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid
nuisances. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to property shield
glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties.
h. ~ The developer shall record the following with Ramsey County:
(1) The documentation to combine the properties into one property for tax and
identification purposes.
(2)
A ten-foot-wide permanent easement for public street right-of-way and
public utility purposes along the south side of the County Road D right-of-
way.
Have the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) review and approve the
proposed utility plans.
The fire chief shall approve the access to the back (northeast side) of the building for
firefighting needs.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
l0
k.j.
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.
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 20-unit addition on the east end of the site. The
developer or builder shall submit all necessary plans to the CDRB for their approval
before the city may issue a building permit for this part of the project.
3. Complete the following before occupying the building:
a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction.
b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards.
Install reflectorized stop signs at each exit, 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.
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)
Construct trash dumpster and recycling enclosures as city code requires for any
dumpsters or storage containers that the owner or building manager would keep
outside the building. Any such enclosures must match the materials and colors
of the building.
Install and taper the concrete sidewalk along Ariel Street to match the driveways.
g. Install and maintain an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas.
Install continuous concrete curb and gutter along all interior driveways and
around all open parking stalls.
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.
Install a six-foot-high solid screening fence along the west property line of the
site. The location, design and materials of the fence shall be subject to city staff
approval.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
Install a quality video surveillance system that covers the underground garage
and its entrance/exit doors. This system shall be subject to the approval of the
Maplewood Police Department.
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. 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. This approval does not include the signs.
All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve
minor changes.
Commissioner Longrie-Kline seconded.
Ayes- Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Shankar
The motion passed.
VI. DESIGN REVIEW
a. Kohl's Department Store Building Addition - Maplewood Mall
Ms. Finwall said Kohl's is proposing a 10,229-square-foot addition to the west side of their
store at the Maplewood Mall. The addition would match the materials and colors of their
existing store. They would revise the site plan to direct the drive lane around the addition and
maintain the same traffic flow that currently exists.
Ms. Finwall said parking compliance was a concern. The applicant has shown that they would
meet parking requirements. The code requires one parking space for each 200 square feet of
leasable floor area. After the proposed addition, the mall would slightly exceed that.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
Ms. Finwall said Kohl's would only be reinstalling the westerly sign due to this proposal. The
existing signs on the south and north elevations would remain. Staff finds no issue with the
relocation of the westerly sign onto the new west elevation.
The applicant has included a site-lighting analysis for the mall parking lot west of Kohl's. They
are proposing to relocate some of the light poles. The lighting code states "if outdoor fixtures
are replaced as part of any construction requiring a building permit, the fixture shall be
upgraded to meet the requirements of this ordinance".
Ms. Finwall said the CDRB decision on this proposal is final unless someone makes an appeal
to the city council. Appeals must be made within 15 days of the board's decision. The city
staff cannot issue a building permit for this project until the end of the 15-day appeal period or
until the city council acts on an appeal.
Board member Longrie-Kline said she would have to abstain from voting in the Kohl's
proposal. Because of her employment with Target Corporation, she reviews proposals for
other Kohl's stores. Despite the fact this Kohl's store is not in her region, she said it could be a
possible conflict of interest.
Mr. Paul Baumgardt, and Mr. Tom McGannon, both engineers with Edwards & Kelcey at 7401
Metro Boulevard, Ste. 3430 in Edina, representing Kohl's, addressed the board.
Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date-stamped February 11, 2003, for the
proposed building addition, wall signs, site plan changes and landscaping changes to Kohl's at
the Maplewood Mall. Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Staff may approve minor changes.
The applicant shall make sure that any new or relocated outdoor lighting fixtures
do not emit more than the allowed maximum of .4 foot-candles of light intensity at
the property line.
Board member Ledvina seconded.
Ayes - Ledvina, Shankar
Abstention - Longrie-Kline
The motion passed.
Countryside Motor's Saab Building Addition and Sales/Storage Lot Expansion -
1180 Highway 36 East
Ms. Finwall said John Schmelz is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Saab
sales/showroom building located within his Countryside Motors automobile dealership at 1180
Highway 36 East. The addition will be 8,61 O-square-feet in area and will have an automobile
repair and service facility. In addition, Mr. Schmelz proposes to expand his automobile
sales/storage lot into a vacant lot next to the Ember's Restaurant. Staff recommends approval
of the proposal with several design conditions.
Board member Shankar asked if staff looked at the existing building materials and the pre-cast
concrete panels for compatibility and color?
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
Ms. Finwall said no she had not.
Chairperson Ledvina asked a representative of the applicant to address the board.
Mr. John Larson with RSP Architects, 1220 Marshall Street NE in Minneapolis, representing
the owner, and Mr. John Schmelz with Countryside Motors, both addressed the board. Mr.
Larson reviewed the colors and materials that would be used on the exterior of the building
with the board.
Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Larson if this is a standard Saab building with standard
parameters that one has to work with to unify the design?
Mr. Larson said yes, Saab USA, Inc. sets the standards.
Chairperson Ledvina asked Mr. Larson about the rooftop equipment and vents on this addition.
Mr. Larson said the rooftop units would be on the service addition portion only. The existing
roof will remain a standing seam metal roof but they are going to reconstruct it to achieve a
better drainage. There are four roof-top units on top of the service addition and they feel with
the height of the parapet wall being two feet above the roof and the roof sloping from west to
east, the units will fall even farther below the wall. Part of those roof-top units will be screened
fairly well by the parapet height and they are also required by the building official to provide
screening as required if those roof-top units don't meet the satisfaction of the city.
Chairperson Ledvina said they would prefer that the rooftop units be located as close to the
parapet walls to benefit from the screening of the walls.
Mr. William McCulhy, a Civil Landscape Engineer with Glen Rehbein Companies, representing
the applicant John Schmelz, addressed the board. Their company was brought in to use the
maximum amount of parking space on the property. They originally created an underground
storage facility for the storm water rather than the ponding plan submitted to the board. The
product is called the uni-ecosystem. It is a paving system that does not produce any runoff. It
is a porous pavement system and it gives storm water the opportunity to sit within the
structural layer of a parking lot surface. The pavement is sized so that you can design for
certain storm events. The water is slowly released from this system before it infiltrates into the
ground. Mr. Schmelz looked at the two costs of these systems and initially determined the uni-
ecosystem was too costly. He wanted to share with the board, the applicant's reluctance to
spend additional money on unneeded things, such as, a wrought iron fence, decorative brick or
stone columns, an electronically controlled entry gate, a black vinyl coated chain-link fence,
irrigation system, and additional landscaping. The applicant, Mr. Schmelz, feels his money
would be better spent on his building and parking lot for his customers. He said the items
mentioned above are nice if they were in a different setting, but are more extravagant then he
needs to have for his car dealership. Mr. Schmelz has now decided to go with the ecosystem.
The reason he is doing this is to allow him to park more cars on his lot. The city will benefit
from this because they will have a showcase parking lot. Also, here is a product that has
never been used in the City of Maplewood and Mr. Schmelz is prepared to be the first. The
watershed district has seen the benefits of this porous paving system and they have granted a
grant towards the cost of this porous paving system.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
14
Mr. McCulhy said they don't know the conditions of this grant but the watershed district has
allocated $20,000 towards the cost of installing this alternative paving system elsewhere. Mr.
McCulhy said this design has similarities to another project they did in White Bear Lake called
the Cummings project. Mr. Schmelz has problems with some of the staff conditions, for
instance having to find water services for the irrigation system. He said planting trees and
additional landscaping could eventually cause problems. Trees can produce sap and the sap
is difficult to get off the cars and can cause damage. Tree limbs can break off and land on
cars and damage them. The applicant would like these conditions changed if possible.
Board member Shankar asked what this paving system looks like?
Mr. McCulhy said there is a gap that is Y2 inch X 1-inch long. He said once these paving
stones interlock, it leaves cells the size of your thumb digit every couple inches and the water
drains into them. This porous pavement system is very stable in northern climates. Two
months ago he attended a seminar held by the Minnesota Irrigation Control Association on
porous pavement systems and everybody in the storm water community was there to see it.
The watershed district is making a statement by granting $20,000 towards this innovative
porous pavement system for his client, John Schmelz.
Mr. John Schmelz, 1180 Highway 36 East in Maplewood, owner and applicant for Countryside
Motors, addressed the board. He showed the board some photos of what is currently on the
property he purchased for his sales/storage lot. Mr. Schmelz said he wanted to show the
board how he will improve the land 150%.
Board member Longrie-Kline asked staff about the striping plan. Is it correct that the applicant
only needs to strip the drive aisles and not the parking spaces?
Ms. Finwall said Mr. Schmelz discussed his concerns with staff regarding the striping of the
parking stalls. Staff directed the question to the Fire Marshal and he indicated that only the
drive aisle itself in the parking lot would need to be 20 feet wide as opposed to the 24 foot in
width as indicated in the staff report. Because of that, staff is not proposing that the parking
spaces be striped at this time unless customer or employee parking is proposed in that lot,
which staff understands it is not.
Board member Longrie-Kline said she thinks the staff recommendation for the wrought iron
fence, decorative stone columns, etc. is consistent in character with an upscale dealership.
She certainly appreciates that the applicant is cleaning up the vacant lot but she also thinks
that the conditions listed by staff are consistent with an upscale dealership and it would look
nice around the property. She asked for clarification regarding the sap falling onto the cars
from trees and doing damage.
Mr. McCulhy said in the landscaping requirements, staff wanted additional landscaping on the
east and west and there is already landscaping on the north. He said any tree that would get
to a significant height could drip onto the cars.
Board member Longrie-Kline asked if there could be trees planted that do not omit sap?
Mr. McCulhy said there are varieties of trees that do not omit sap.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
Chairperson Ledvina said perhaps the applicant could work with staff to select the correct tree
varieties to eliminate any sap problems from happening.
Board member Shankar asked staff what was to the east of this property?
Ms. Finwall said it is a combined business and a single-family house and another single-family
house.
Board member Shankar asked staff if the vinyl-coated fence would provide a better division
between the lot and the single-family home rather than a chain-linked fence?
Ms. Finwall said the city is approving the expansion of a non-conforming use in that this
parking lot or sales/storage lot for automobiles is required by the city ordinance to be up to 350
feet from residential property. In this case, the applicant is proposing to come within 20 feet of
residential properties. Because of that, staff feels there should be mitigating conditions that
help shield and protect this commercial business from the surrounding single-family homes.
Staff feels that the black-vinyl-coated chain link fence is an enhancement over a regular chain
link fence with barbed wire on the top.
Chairperson Ledvina said he agrees with Ms. Longrie-Kline's comments regarding the fencing.
He doesn't think it should be required to have an electronically controlled gate and could be
eliminated. In his opinion, the chain-link fence in front of the dealership should also be
replaced. He thinks the front of the Saab building has a nice appearance and when you see
the chain-link fence, it has no curb appeal. He would like to add to the staff recommendation
the removal of the chain-link fence in front of the dealership and replacing it with the same type
of fence required in front of the sales/storage lot. In his opinion, there is quite a lot of money
invested in the building. The addition of architectural elements, landscaping and an
architecturally compatible fence is a small expense compared to what is being done to the site.
Mr. Larson said the client understands the need to have a nice appearance from the street.
The client does not want nor does he require the need to have fencing in the front of the
building. With a different building, that may be appropriate, but not in this situation. He said
the client thinks this requirement is a bit over the top. Requiring fencing does allow the client's
customers to see the cars.
Chairperson Ledvina said he appreciates the opinions that were shared but the city is looking
for something with a higher standard for the property. The changes that have already been
made are very nice and should continue with the staff recommendations. He is willing to
entrust the details to be worked out with the applicant and staff regarding those elements.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
16
Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date-stamped January 24, 2003, for the
proposed Saab building addition and sales/storage lot expansion to Countryside Motors
automobile dealership at 1180 Highway 36 East. Approval is subject to the property owner
doing the following: (changes or additions are in bold and deletions have a strike
through)
Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
Signs shown on the site plan and building elevations are not part of this approval and
will require separate sign permits.
Submit the following for staff approval before the city issues a grading or building
permit:
a. Final grading, paving, drainage, utility and erosion control plans. These plans shall
meet the requirements of the city code and the city engineer.
b. Address all of the concerns (mentioned below) to the satisfaction of the St. Paul
Regional Water Services:
(a) Verify location of all water mains within the property.
(b) Verify that the necessary easements exist for all water mains.
(c)
Relocate the proposed training wall and subsequent grading for the new
sales/storage lot so that it is no closer than 15 feet from the centerline of
the existing water main in the vacated Cope Avenue right-of-way.
(d)
Ensure the St. Paul Regional Water Services has access to all water
mains on the property.
(e)
Verify the location of the water services to Ember's Restaurant and any
grading over the water services.
(3)
Verification that John Schmelz is the fee owner of the 30-foot wide portion of the
vacated Cope Avenue right-of-way that runs along the south portion of the
expanded sales/storage lot property.
(4)
drive aisles that are at least 20 feet in width.
The plan must include
(5)
A revised site plan showing:
a) that the new sales/storage lot is setback 20 feet from the eastern
residential property line.
b)
that the existing fence in front of the Saab building be
removed and replaced with a fence compatible to the required
north sales/storage lot fence described below.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
17
(6)
Elevations of the proposed fence and gate. The north elevation should include a
........ ~.. -.A_ · .... or pre-cast
..... ~,,, -' .......... decorative fence with brick, e~ stone -'-"
concrete columns o"'~ ~n "1'""+'"";""'" ""'"'+'"'~"~ ght ;'"'" '""+"' '"~+" on
.................. ~ ........... W,"OU ..........
the front of the sales/storage lot; and a black vinyl coated chain-link fence on the
sides and rear of the sales/storage lot subject to the approval of staff. The
fence may be up to a height of 8 feet.
(7) A revised landscape plan to include:
(a)
Trees and shrubs to be planted in front of the sales/storage lot, along the
frontage road.
(b)
A row of columnar trees (narrow trees such as arborvitae or lindens)
between Ember's parking lot and the new sales/storage lot.
(c)
=--*----~:---- *~' ....... ~ pi
.......... ~ ,,,~ .... ,,, Re acing the Colorado blue spruce with Black
hills spruce and extending the row of Colorado blue spruce and Isanti
dogwood along the top of the entire retaining wall (both south and east,
adjacent both residential properties).
(d)
The pond should be vegetated with native grasses with Forbes. Native
shrubbery and trees should be planted on the upland portion of the
perimeter of the pond.
(e)
All landscaped areas, excluding landscaping within the pond, must have
an underground irrigation system.
(8)
A revised outdoor lighting and photometric plan. The revised plan shall show the
height and style of all outdoor lights (including relocated lights), and that the light
illumination from all outdoor lights does not exceed .4 foot candles at all property
lines.
(9) A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior
improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work.
d. Complete the following before occupying the sales/storage lot:
(1) Install all bituminous or engineered porous surface and curb and gutter.
(2) Stripe all drive aisles.
(3) Install the approved fence.
(4)
Install all required landscaping by June 1 if the sales/storage lot is finished in the
fall or winter, or within six weeks of completion of the sales/storage lot if it is
finished in the spring or summer.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
VII.
VIII.
]8
Board member Longrie-Kline seconded.
(5) Install all required exterior lights.
Complete the following before occupying the Saab building:
(1) Install all required exterior improvements.
(2) Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent residential
property. (all roof-top equipment and vents should be located as close to
the parapet walls or as appropriate to provide the best screening possible).
(3) Ensure all traSh dumpsters are enclosed in a trash enclosure, subject to staff
approval, if there would be outside trash storage.
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 above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of
Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall
complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 if occupancy of the
building is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy of the building if
occupancy is in the spring or summer.
All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Shankar
The motion passed.
This item will go to the city council on Monday, March 31,2003.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None.
BOARD PRESENTATIONS
Board member Shankar was unable to attend the city council meeting so Ms. Finwall gave the
report that Ohlson Landscaping was approved and the 2002 CDRB Annual Report was
approved by the city council.
a. CDRB Representation needed at the city council meeting for March 31, 2003.
Board member Shankar will be the CDRB representative at the March 31, 2003, city council
meeting. Items to be discussed will be Countryside Motors Sales/Storage Lot Expansion.
There is a possibility that the Sibley Cove Apartment proposal may be reconsidered as well.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 3-11-2003
IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
Ms. Finwall said she sent an e-mail thanking Mr. John Carmody for the Sustainable Building
Presentation he gave a few weeks ago. Ms. Finwall said she included some information on
the City of Oakdale's Green Building Program in the board's packet. This is a volunteer
program where they try to promote more environmentally friendly and sustainable building
issues.
X. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.