Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL JOINT WORK SESSION – JANUARY 19, 2016 3 <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler indicated that the B-2 District Design Standards require commercial <br />buildings with frontage on a public street to have a minimum façade transparency of 50 percent. <br />The approved development plans granted Goodwill flexibility on this requirement, allowing for <br />transparent window coverage of 26.4 percent on the County Road E façade. The addition of the <br />two transparent windows would bring the development into closer conformity with the B-2 <br />District Design Standards. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler stated that the Development Contract and PUD Agreement for the <br />project requires that any significant changes to the approved plans be reviewed and approved by <br />the Planning Commission and City Council. The City Attorney advised that because the <br />modification is minor and brings the building in closer conformance with the City’s standards the <br />proposal could be approved administratively. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes stated that she was dismayed that this item was on the agenda. She <br />believed that the request should have been handled administratively. She questioned why the <br />applicant could not follow the plan approved by the City. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher explained that the plan approved by the City <br />Council for the Goodwill Store had some non-transparent windows on the County Road E facade. <br />The applicant asked last Wednesday if two of the non-transparent windows could be replaced with <br />transparent windows. She reported that normally any changes would have to be approved by the <br />Council. However, the proposed change more closely aligned with the goals and objectives <br />within City Code. After speaking with the City Attorney, it was determined that staff could <br />approve the change. It was noted that staff sent an email to the City Councilmembers to see if <br />there was any objection and one objection was brought to staff’s attention. In the end, she reported <br />that the applicant withdrew its request and would be installing the windows as shown in their <br />plans. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden did not understand why the applicant assumed that they would receive <br />an immediate response from City staff regarding this matter. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant reiterated that typically when an applicant makes a change to their plans, this <br />requires City Council review. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden suggested that the Council discuss the administrative/Council procedure <br />for approving plan changes in the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung reported that he had no objection to the requested change by the <br />applicant. He expressed some concern with the quick turnaround the applicant was demanding <br />from the City. He was in favor of the Council discussing the administrative approval process at a <br />future Council work session. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant requested that administrative changes be discussed by the City Council at a future <br />work session. <br /> <br />C. Outdoor Display and Sales Zoning Regulations <br />