Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-11-24 CDRB Minutes MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2009 I. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairperson Wise called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Boardmember Jason Lamers Chairperson Mall Ledvina Boardmember Michael Mireau Boardmember Ananth Shankar Vice Chairperson Mall Wise Present Absent Absent Present Present Staff Present: Michael Martin. Planner III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boardmember Shankar moved to approve the agenda as presented. Boardmember Lamers seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. October 13, 2009 and November 10, 2009 Boardmember Shankar moved to table the minutes of October 13, 2009 and November 10, 2009, due to lack of a quorum. Boardmember Lamers seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all V. DESIGN REVIEW a. Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment, Panera Bread, 2515 White Bear Avenue (Mapleridge Shopping Center) Planner Michael Martin presented the staff report for the request from Panera Bread for approval of a comprehensive sign plan amendment for the Mapleridge Shopping Center, located at 2515 White Bear Avenue. The applicant is proposing to install an awning that would have the company's wheat graphic displayed. The current comprehensive sign plan does not address the use of awnings for signs. Design plans were approved in August 2006 for this site showing solid colors being used for the awnings. Boardmember Wise asked if the sign application submilled by Pan era Bread is tied to this request. Planner Martin responded that the wall sign request is a separate request and not tied to tonight's comprehensive sign plan amendment request. Community Design Review Board 2 Minutes 11-24-2009 Boardmember Shankar asked if the request with the wheat graphic is considered advertising. Planner Martin responded that the reason staff is recommending denial of this request is that the wheat graphic would be a sign for Panera Bread and would create an inconsistent look within the shopping center. Mr. Martin explained the sign plan approved in 2006 had solid colors that were intended to show consistency from store to store. Scoll Laage of Leroy Signs was present representing Panera Bread. Mr. Laage showed samples of the awning material and said that the various locations in the area have the wheat graphic on the awning. Boardmember Lamers said he feels the tone and brightness of the new colors proposed for the awning are different from what exists and would change the image of the shopping center. Boardmember Shankar said since not all of the tenants have awnings, there is already an inconsistent look and questioned whether a different kind of awning would make it worse. Boardmember Lamers questioned if Panera Bread has made this awning change at other area locations as part of their national imaging, does Maplewood not want to be a part of that. John Hohman, operating partner of Panera Bread, said the wheat graphic is used in many of the Panera Bread sites in the Twin Cities, but not everyone of them. Mr. Hohman said there are a variety of different colored designs used. Mr. Hohman said they are pulling a large commitment into the remodel of the interior and exterior of this site and they feel the new awnings proposed improve the look of the exterior. Boardmember Shankar said he does not equate the wheat graphic with the golden arches or the apple and that he is ambivalent for that being considered sign age. John Nephew, 628 County Road B East, asked if the notification to neighboring properties included the tenants of the shopping center. Planner Martin responded that typically only property owners are notified; therefore the tenants were not notified. Mr. Martin said the property owner of the shopping center supports this amendment. Planner Martin explained that if this request were to be approved, it would apply to all tenants in the center. Board members voiced their concerns that the tenants have a chance to speak to this maller, that their opinions maller, and to make them aware that the board is trying to do what it can to reinvest in the shopping center. Board members agreed they do not consider the wheat graphic a sign and that other companies also use a wheat graphic. Planner Martin explained to the board that the current comprehensive sign plan requires landlord approval of any signs by the owner of the building. Mr. Martin said any sign application request needs the approval of the property owner before staff considers it and this application was signed by the building owner. Boardmember Shankar moved to approve the comprehensive sign plan amendment as visualized by plans date-stamped October 30, 2009 for the proposed awning sign for Panera Bread at the Mapleridge Shopping Center, 2515 White Bear Avenue. This approval is based upon the tenants of the shopping center approving this signage and awning for Panera Bread. Boardmember Lamers seconded Community Design Review Board 3 Minutes 11-24-2009 Boardmember Wise suggested a friendly amendment be added to clarify what tenant approval would be required. Boardmember Shankar said he would request that staff survey the tenants to see that a majority of the tenants approve this awning and sign age. Boardmembers Shankar and Lamers approved that the friendly amendment be added to the motion. The board voted: Ayes - all The motion passed. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS Boardmember Wise spoke concerning the safety of monopoles. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Planner Martin reported that the city council held the first reading of the sign code amendment. Mr. Martin said the amendment was approved with changes to the percentage of window signage allowed and the timeframe. Mr. Martin explained the amendment will go back to the city council for the second reading before it is adopted into code. Planner Martin said the terms for board members Shankar and Wise will end this year and reminded those board members that applications for reappointment are due by November 30. Planner Martin requested that board members let staff know if they will be unable to make the December 22 scheduled board meeting. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 6:35 p.m.