10-06-10-PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

How much is too much? We are told the P.U.D. process allows more interesting development by relaxing some of the constraints imposed by state statutes, zoning regulations, and building codes. The P.U.D. process encourages flexibility and negotiations. Developers get bigger, taller buildings and higher densities; cities get smaller building footprints, underground parking, more greenspace, and flora. One of the ironies of this development is that creative adaptation has been left out of the process. PHS is proposing the same old efficient, 4 -story building they always build in their commercial settings without any adaptation to the realities of the purely residential nature of the area. The exterior "look" may vary, the shape may vary, but the interior requirements dictate the exterior size. One of the good things about statutes and regulations is that they give you benchmarks which are needed to evaluate a building e.g., is it over or under 35 feet? The flexibility of a P.U.D. removes the benchmarks, but it doesn't remove the city's responsibility to protect residents from excess, from encroachment of incompatible uses. Can a building ever be too big? too close? Of course. Where do you draw the line? When is the harm so egregious that it cannot be allowed to proceed? When is more negotiation needed? When are all the stakeholders seated at the table? Recommendations There are many specific suggestions for improvements we have bandied about. Some have been suggested in the preceding text. At this point the most fruitful course of action seems to be slow down the process so we can participate at a more reasoned pace. The library is no longer a reason for haste. The only reason we see for haste at this point is to minimize our opportunity to understand what is happening to us. Last night (Tuesday) we were told as much. We were told delay will cost PHS as they try to incorporate changes from the city and from neighbors. 1. Slow down. Let's talk about specific issues that may or may not turn out to be problematic. Perhaps tonight's (September 29 open house at PHS will someday be seen as a good start and a helpful opportunity to engage both PHS and Arden Hills officials. 2. We would like to see a three dimensional model that shows the development with surrounding homes and elevations to correct scale. The need for this may have been mitigated by tonight's open house at PHS (September 29"'). 3. The size /proximity of the main building is clearly our most disturbing concern. Open the door to talks that address that concern. 4. Remove facility traffic from Shorewood Drive. So far we do not understand why traffic would be routed here when better options seem to be available. We are willing to talk, and to listen. Shorewood Drive. Page 12 of 15