2011_0822_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment D how the percentage of flexible versus urban frontage was determined. Councilmember Punt opined that it would appear that a business owner could put their structure on 85% of their lot and still meet that regulation. Mayor Roe rephrased the concern in how the greenway and/or urban frontage was enforced,, and where the transition point was or who determined where that line was. Mr. Lamb noted,, on the first u-shaped building on Iona or the first parcel, there was the ability to place both comers at urban frontages,, or stretch it out and shorten those bays. Mayor Roe questioned if urban frontage was indicated along a particular parcel, what the length of that line would be from an enforcement perspective; opining that it would appear to open up to endless arguments with developers. Mr. Lamb noted that there were no dimensions on the Plan,, but that they could be scaled at the City's discretion. Mayor Roe asked City Planner Paschke how staff would know where the distinction was at between frontages on one particular parcel. Mr. Paschke advised that the City would be working from a larger-scale map, with different layers through the GIS database within Ramsey County's property information,, which would clearly define right-of-way widths, and widths, depths and square footages of lots. Mr. Paschke opined that he didn't see this Regulating Map acting any differently; and that it would clearly provide build-to areas and their widths; the width for greenway frontages; and the length of the lines for various frontages; with it becoming the Official Map; not the one used in this size format for discussion purposes. Mayor Roe noted the need for a reference in code for such a document to address developer questions. Mayor Roe noted Attachment F (ordinance language), line 249, referenced a section that is currently blank and needing to be filled in before adopting the ordinance; and suggested that was the City's landscape section of the zoning code. Councilmember Pint noted a similar blank at line 203 of the document. Mr. Paschke advised that it was referencing Section 5 within this ordinance. Mayor Roe suggested, with concurrence by Councilmember Pint, a more clear reference for internal purposes and defining specific for staff enforcement and to avoid potential issues in the future. Councilmember McGehee reiterated her concerns with build-to lines and sufficient space for trees or how plantings would be defined and regulated. Mayor Roe suggested refocusing on how all the pieces fit together, with the AUAR based on square footage limits or other factors on each lot; and the reality if a particular parcel designated a frontage area, at least some portion of the building had to be in that frontage; limiting the type of building. Mayor Roe questioned if that was how this all fit to"ether for regulation, with the 85% coverage limitation defined within those frontages limiting what else could be done on that particular parcel. Mr. Lamb concurred to a certain extent; however, he noted that every square foot had I not been pinpointed, but based on feedback received to-date,, the attempt had been made to hang onto the public realm opportunities that were most important to allow access and connection to Langton Lake Park; to define building frontages and restrict