2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 1,2005 6 . 17. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Rice Creek Water Shed District and Ramsey County. 18. The developcr shall work with the City when locating and replatting thc City trail so as to save as many ofthc existing trees in this arca as possiblc. 19. Thc developmcnt shall be of a Hardy-board lap style exterior with a brick base consistent with revised elevations which shall bc submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Pemlit. 20. The proposed canopies, similar to the style in the pictures presented to the Planning Commission at their June 1, 2005 mecting shall be includcd on the revised elevations whieh shall be submitted to the City fix revicw and approval prior to the issuance of a Building Pcrmit. 21. Revised plans shall denote the changc from a boulder style retaining wall to a versa- lock rctaining wall. 22. The building containing units 26-30 may be occupicd by only onc business; for this building the maximum wall signage may bc 60 squarc feet, in addition the southerly facing wall shall have no more than 30 squarc feet. The total square feet of signage f<-)r this building would not exceed 90 square fect. . Vice Chair Zimmerman inquircd about thc lot size. He asked when thcy had multiplc lots in a dcvelopmcnt, what were thc underlying zoning rcquirements. Mr. Hellegers rcplicd this parcel was a large piece of propel1y and as a part of the PUD it did allow them to havc flexibility to look at different configurations. Vice Chair Zimmemlan stated since these were otlice condominiums sold as individual parcels, then they had to go back to thc 13,000 square foot lot sizc, unless thcy chosc to vary fhnn that zoning rcquircment. Mr. llcllcgers replied he did not believe the intent was to have individual units of 13,000 square foot lot size. Vice Chair Zimmcrman exprcssed conccrn about density on a smaller piece of propcrty than they would nonnally have. Mr. Hellegers directed him to page 5 of stafrs report where it indicated the density ratio was considerably lower than the maximum. Commissioner Larson asked if it was customary that they look at the main building material covering as being what is controllcd by the ordinance, or is it all materials, or did they make exception f<-)r a minor use of that material. Mr. Hcllegcrs rcplied at the time thcy were trying to do something similar to an Eden Prairie development in which it was brick all of the way up to the top of the windows with stucco above that. He noted it did not break down primary or secondary materials, but he wanted the Commissioncrs to know what they were looking at. Ile notcd the design materials now being proposed were brick below the windows with hardy board above. . Vice Chair Zimmcnnan stated hardy board in his opinion was less desirable building material than stucco.