My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1998-11-30
NewBrighton
>
Council
>
Minutes - City Council
>
Minutes 1998
>
1998-11-30
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/8/2005 3:48:41 PM
Creation date
8/8/2005 1:48:22 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />November 30, 1998 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Council Business. continued <br /> <br />This district is intended for certain sections of the Highway 8 Corridor, primarily north <br />of 1-694 along Old Hwy 8. It allows for flexibility in the development of high intensity <br />mixed uses and proposes standards prohibiting activities such as outside storage. <br /> <br />Over the last few months, staff, Planning Commission, Council, and City Attorney <br />Charlie LeFevere drafted the ordinance to reflect the goals outlined in the Hwy 8 <br />Corridor Study and Vision. Two uses which would become non-conforming under the <br />new ordinance would be; Rauenhorst Trucking and the Farm Bureau Co-op. Benke <br />asked if there could be conflicts with smaller sites. Teague confirmed the minimal site <br />size for industrial uses is five acres, and sites under that amount would become non- <br />conforming uses. <br /> <br />The MX District is intended to be a place where buildings and the street have a <br />relationship with dedicated, safe walking paths. Uses are integrated and buildings have <br />the appearance of being related or connected. The intent is to provide reasonable usage <br />of existing properties while creating incentives for high intensity mixed uses consistent <br />with the Vision. This amendment creates the MX District, but does not specifically <br />rezone properties. Single family detached housing, retail uses other than neighborhood <br />retail, and automotive services are not allowable in this district. Retail for neighborhood <br />needs are limited to a maximum of 5,000 sq. ft. with the exception of hardware, <br />grocery, video and variety stores. There is no minimum lot size for permitted uses. <br /> <br />The district allows for residential and mixed uses at a higher density, and allows for <br />large scale industrial and business as Special Uses. Industrial uses shall have a minimal <br />of 5 acres, and the building shall not occupy more than 10% of the total site. <br />Commercial uses shall have a minimal of 5 acres which the floor area does not exceed <br />10% of the total site area or 50,000 sq. ft. Residential uses must be high density with a <br />minimal of 5 acres and up to 100 units. A mixture of uses would be allowed and <br />increased densities serve as an incentive. The special use process gives the City more <br />control over residential developments. <br /> <br />Benke asked the basis for the requirement of a maximum 5,000 sq. ft. for retail <br />business. Teague said the intent is to allow for smaller scale commercial uses similar to <br />those currently in Olde Downtown. <br /> <br />Hoffman asked if there are other communities with a MX District, and have they been <br />successful. LeFevere said Richfield, Edina, and Brooklyn Center currently have similar <br />districts. This district is designed to go beyond the typical planned unit development and <br />provides flexibility and creates incentives for a denser utilization of the land. <br /> <br />Benke added that ordinances created years ago reflect the trend for separated uses with <br />larger lot requirements. The MX District provides for urban style planning with mixed <br />and more intense uses. Across the country there is a movement to more intense land <br />usage, and the I-35W Corridor Coalition is addressing this. One question is how such <br />developments impact adjacent facilities, infrastructures, and traffic. Teague feels those <br />issues would need to be reviewed on an individual basis when proposals are presented. <br /> <br />Council Business <br /> <br />MX Zoning District <br />Report 98-223 <br />Ordinance 648 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.