06-08-11-PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

original Master Plan. The movement of the building towards Lexington Avenue and the subsequent removal of one row of parking is also an improvement to the overall look of the project from the street. The height of the building has also been increased, which was a concern with the original plan because the grade of the site is below County Road E. The proposed plan also has some drawbacks that have been identified by Staff. The drive-aisle between Building 1 and County Road E has been widened, increasing the amount of pavement visible from County Road E. Additional landscaping may be necessary to properly soften this edge of the site and improve the appearance from County Road E. Similar to the PUD Amendment proposal the Council reviewed and tabled last summer, this proposal does not include the 4,700 square foot retail building, which was to be attached to the pharmacy. According to the developer, there is concern about their ability to fill these spaces if they are built, and the pharmacy was not open to having this building attached. In addition, the reorientation of the building to the south makes finding a way to incorporate the additional retail square footage difficult. The building itself represents a fairly typical CVS franchise design. An EFIS arcade would wrap around three sides of the building, and the brick face on the building is shown as a veneer. There is a minimal amount of transparent glass, and the applicant would likely be seeking flexibility from this aspect of the Code. There are examples of CVS Pharmacies that contain considerably more brick and glass (Attachment D). Because the desire for more glass and façade interest is common in many communities, CVS has incorporated on other projects building graphics in the form of unique murals that take the place of transparent windows. The Planning Commission may want to consider if there is an interest in learning more about this design technique used by CVS. It is unclear from this application what aspects of the Code would be exceeded in exchange for other flexibilities being requested, such as lesser building materials and transparent glass. Overall, this proposal is substantially similar to the Master Plan, which was approved in 2009; however, aspects of the site layout have been revised in a manner that the developer believes will help the project move forward to construction. The Planning Commission is being asked to review the attached site plan, discuss the proposed changes to the layout, and provide feedback to the developer as they move forward with a formal application for a PUD Amendment. Deadline for Agency Actions There are no review deadlines associated with concept review applications. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 8, 2011 \\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Cases\2011\11-008 - Arden Plaza Concept Review (Pending)\06-08-11 - Arden Plaza Concept Review - PC Memo.doc Page 4 of 5