10-25-21-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—OCTOBER 25, 2021 6 districts and consideration for amending the language from 20 feet to 50 feet to be consistent with the B-3 District. In addition, the Council reviewed removal of two parking setback requirements that would allow a Developer more flexibility in the placement of buildings and parking areas in the B-2 District. Senior Planner Jagoe stated from this initial work session, the City Council also identified additional concerns with building fagade requirements. In 2019 and 2020, the City Council held two more work sessions whereby providing feedback and direction to staff on revisions for consideration in the B-2 District. The Council requested staff review the transparency requirements for commercial developments as well as the use of other types of coating on glass as a means of complying with ordinance requirements. Senior Planner Jagoe reported at the work session meeting on December 21, 2020, the City Council discussed the Staff suggested amendments regarding front yard setback and removal of design standard language in order to allow more flexibility in placement of the buildings in B-2 District. The consensus was to remove a sentence within Commercial Fagade Transparency, Section 1325.05, Subd. 8, F.1 that allowed discretion for waiving the transparency requirements. The rational was that this flexibility already exists through the Planned Unit Development review and a Developer could suggest alternate considerations. For fagade transparency, the City will continue to require 50% of all first level building facades that front a public street to be comprised of transparent windows or doors. The language to be removed was a second requirement of 20% for all facades that are reasonably visible from the right-of-way. With the language amendments to the building and parking setbacks it is anticipated that there will be fewer issues on design challenges with building orientation and the back side of a building facing the public street. The proposed changes still ensures that the appearance of blank walls would not face the street. Following the discussion, Staff was directed to bring forward the proposed ordinance amendments to the Planning Commission and to hold a public hearing which was completed on October 6th. Senior Planner Jagoe explained the proposed ordinance language from Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 applies to New Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 District. The City Council has identified that a further review of the B-3 District standards may be forthcoming. However, priority has been given to removal of outdated language and modifying language with an emphasis pertinent to the B-2 District. Staff commented further on the proposed zoning code amendment and recommended the Council hold a public hearing. Councilmember Holden asked if these standards would apply if it was not a PUD. Senior Planner Jagoe explained a property within the B-2 District would have to comply to the proposed standards and noted that a PUD would allow that flexibility. Councilmember Holden questioned if back lit Spandrel glass could be requested through flexibility. Senior Planner Jagoe reported this was the case. Mayor Grant opened the public hearing at 8:08 p.m.