Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – MAY 18, 2015 3 <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher stated that at work sessions on May 2 and 4, <br />2015, the City Council discussed: <br /> <br /> Changes to the size, density, and permitted uses with the Neighborhood and Neighborhood <br />Transition districts. <br /> Language restricting warehousing as an accessory use to Manufacturing and Processing <br />within the Flex Office and Campus Commercial districts. <br /> Additional requirements for the Overlay District. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher explained that staff has been working with <br />Kimley-Horn and the City Attorney to address these items. She reviewed the proposed changes in <br />further detail with the Council and asked for comments. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woodburn asked if the warehousing space would be allowed in office and <br />manufacturing. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher discussed the draft language and noted that the <br />Code was proposing to only allow warehousing as an accessory to manufacturing uses. She <br />indicated that manufacturing uses would have to have 30% office space. She provided further <br />comment on manufacturing business park standards. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden discussed the 30% office space requirement. She wanted to see a clear <br />division between principal and secondary uses for manufacturing sites. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant expressed concern with the manufacturing language stating that he did not want to <br />see substantial warehousing on these sites. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik reviewed the redundancy in the Code language regarding primary and <br />secondary uses noting again that 30% of manufacturing sites would have to be office. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes wanted to see manufacturing as the exclusive or principal use on site <br />and not warehousing. <br /> <br />Further discussion ensued regarding manufacturing and warehouse uses. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woodburn was in favor of leaving the language ‘as is’. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant questioned if the Council supported the density numbers within the TCAAP <br />Redevelopment Code (TRC). <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung did not support the numbers. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes was in favor of the proposed density numbers. She requested further <br />clarification on the differences between NB-3 and NB-4. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher explained that the differences between NB-3 <br />and NB-4 noting the uses that are allowed as well as those that are not allowed for each.