Agenda - Economic Development Authority - 06/08/2017

Home

was to have higher design standards. He did not believe that would be appropriate to have the standards community wide. Member Williams stated that she appreciates that the desire to stay strong to the architectural desires. She stated that with retail that could become a concern. She stated that it is important in the western and southern portion of The COR, and she would not want a development to look out at the back of a building. She stated that it is important to have four-sided design for buildings, so that you prevent a development from looking out at the back of a strip mall with no design and just back doors. She stated if you are going to require four-sided development, the City should also ensure that the sign ordinance would allow for signage on all sides. She provided examples of four-sided development that has been well done in The COR. Community Development Director stated that there is flexibility to allow signage on all sides but the conflict often comes with the type of signage allowed. He noted that the discussion would play out with the Stonebrook Academy application as that moves forward. He noted that business will have their front entrance on the side opposite of Sunwood Drive and therefore the four-sided design will be important as the back of their building will be facing Sunwood. Member Williams stated that she would want to ensure that the back of the building facing Sunwood still looks like the front as well, since that is the main roadway for The COR. Community Development Director Gladhill summarized the input from the EDA regarding the vision statement, noting that the EDA would like to be market driven rather than dictating the market, with an emphasis of that discussion related to different types of retail users; for parking the EDA would be open to all parking options, but does not want to force shared/structured parking on developers; and in regard to architecture the EDA would like to emphasize four-sided design and would want to ensure signage is allowed for all sides if desired. Member Riley stated that he feels the vision statement needs more amendments than what was mentioned. Community Development Director Gladhill noted that this is intended to be an interim document and if the master developer route is chosen, that group would work with the EDA and Planning Commission to further develop the plan and implementation of the plan. He noted that the Planning Commission would focus on developing the plan while the EDA would focus on implementation of the plan. He noted that the document has been setup to allow for additional input from a master developer. Motion by Member Skaff, seconded by Member Brunt, to recommend to City Council that approve The COR Interim Development Plan for public comment, incorporating the consensus statements from the EDA. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Steffen, Members Skaff, Brunt, Burandt, Riley, and Williams. Voting No: None. Absent: Member Hardin. 4.02: State of Minnesota Economic Development Marketing Initiative Economic Development Authority/May 25, 2017 Page 5 of 7