My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-21-13 Worksession
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
10-21-13-WS
>
10-21-13 Worksession
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/22/2013 9:27:00 AM
Creation date
10/22/2013 9:26:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
10-21-13 Worksession
General - Type
10-21-13 Worksession
Category
10-21-13 Worksession
Date
10/21/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
103
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
previous version of the draft revisions was discussed by the Planning Commission at the May 8, <br />2013, meeting. The minutes from this meeting are included as an attachment. <br /> <br />In coming up with development design standards, it is important to strike a balance between <br />regulations that are either too prescriptive or too permissive. When cities put in place strict <br />standards, it can have the effect of deterring development. On the other hand, relaxed standards <br />can result in development that is not in line with a <br /> <br />The City has an additional opportunity to negotiate with developers on the design of a project <br />because all significant developments and redevelopments in the B-2 and B-3 Districts are <br />required to be approved through the PUD process. This gives the City the ability to address <br />design-related concerns specific to a site that may not be covered in the design standard <br />regulations; however, any conditions imposed by the City through negotiations must have a <br />rational basis related to the expected impacts of a development. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />Building Materials <br />Section D of the design standards specifies acceptable and undesirable building materials. Staff <br />has revised this section to expand and refine the list of permitted and discouraged materials as <br />wells as to build in more flexibility for staff in the development review process. <br /> <br />Research was conducted on high-quality building materials that are currently not on the <br />acceptable materials list and which meet the design guidelines. Many of these materials are <br />permitted by other local municipalities that have established design standards for commercial <br />centers or downtowns. Design guidelines for Roseville, Shoreview, Burnsville, and Hopkins <br />were reviewed. The section on undesirable building materials has been expanded to include brick <br />veneer and mirrored or reflective glass. <br /> <br />Given the pace at which building material technology evolves, staff believes a provision should <br />be included in the section that allows the Community Development Department to approve new <br />materials of equal quality other than those listed. An example of how this provision could be <br />worded is included in the draft. <br /> <br />Commercial Façade Transparency <br />Section F of the design standards includes requirements on the transparent window and door <br />coverage for commercial properties. Window transparency for multi-family residential uses, <br />which are allowed in the B-2 District as a conditional use, is not addressed. Additionally, specific <br />guidelines on the arrangement of windows on a building and the permitted materials for windows <br />and doors are not included. <br /> <br />Staff has made revisions to include transparency requirements for residential facades. The <br />specifications are intended to conform to the existing design standards while recognizing that <br /> <br />City of Arden Hills <br />City Council Work Session for October, 21 2013 <br /> <br />23 <br />Page of <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.