CCP 03-26-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001 14 Commissioner Erickson stated he would support eliminating the use of decorative block, since it would probably not be appropriate with a high-rise office building which would probably be a . brick and glass type of structure, Mr. McClure stated the use of decorative block would be applicable with a single-story office building, He suggested decorative block be limited to single structure buildings and remain within the secondary materials at 30%. Commissioner Erickson stated he does not support the use of Exterior Insulation and Finish System (EIFS) on a high-rise building, Mr. Dowdy noted that EIFS canoot exceed 30% but more definition could be included, Commissioner Erickson stated he believes there are concerns with EIFS related to durability and longevity, The Planoing Commission agreed that EIFS would be added to the secondary materials list (Section 4B) and be limited to 10%. Commissioner Erickson asked what was intended with decorative masonry. Mr. Dowdy stated it would be integral colored split face, not brick, Chair Baker suggested use of the term "decorative clay masonry," especially given the discussion that the height of the ramps is not yet known, The Planoing Commission agreed that Section 4F would be revised to state: "Structured parking facilities shall meet the same architectural standards as primary structures." . Commissioner Erickson questioned Section 7 which addressed roof-top units. Mr. Dowdy explained the rationale for requiring an organized pattern of roof-top units. Commissioner Erickson noted that the rooftop of a one-story unit would be visible from the freeway. Mr. Shardlow agreed that would be the case, Commissioner Erickson stated the organization would be appreciated in that situation but a parapet would be a more desirable way to do it. Mr. Shardlow suggested the standard be set and addressed when the Final Plan is submitted. He noted that in this case, the standard is clear that the rooftop equipment shall be completely screened from the ground-level view, The Commission agreed to strike Section 10 and revise Section II to indicate: "A color and materials [mish board, elevations, and architectural renderings shall be submitted for Planoing Commission review and City Council approval at the time of submittal for final plat." Chair Baker stated there were no questions on the "Accessory Buildings" section. He reviewed the "Parking Requirement" section and asked about the term "decorative wall." The Planoing Commission agreed to revise Section 3 to indicate: "".such frontage shall be screened with a decorative wall of compatible material with the primary building, railing, hedge"," The Planoing Commission agreed to revise "Loading Docks" to indicate: "",80% opaque within . two years, and by a screen wall of the same materials and colors as the principal building."