Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 11 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Commission gives nod to building designs
Published Wednesday, November 4, 2009
The Albert Lea Planning Commission on Tuesday unanimously recommended the approval of the revised B-2 Community Business District design standards ordinance to the Albert Lea City Council.
With minimal discussion during a public hearing for the amendment, the commissioners approved a few small word changes to the ordinance and then voted to move it forward.
The ordinance will next come before the council for approval on Monday.
“I appreciate the fact that the commission took the time to listen and make some changes that I think are flexible and yet do set a tone for what we want to see in the city,” said Randy Kehr, executive director of the Albert Lea-Freeborn County Chamber of Commerce, who was the only member of the public to speak at the hearing.
Kehr, who spoke for just a brief moment, said no business owner had asked him to come speak against the revisions.
That was a major difference from the first public hearing on the ordinance back in August. As the document got revised, Kehr said he thought many of the issues of concern had been addressed.
Now, according to the proposed draft, the intent of the standards amendment is to establish a series of attractive entrances and main thoroughfares within the city.
If approved by the council, the ordinance amendment will apply mainly to new construction on Albert Lea’s major entrances, specifically East and West Main Street, Blake Avenue, parts of North Bridge Avenue, South Broadway Avenue between Front and Seventh streets and then the east side of Southeast Broadway Avenue to the Elks Lodge. Albert Lea’s historic downtown is in a separate district.
Businesses that expand by more than 50 percent of their existing floorspace would also be affected, while businesses that expand by less than 50 percent will simply be encouraged to follow the guidelines, under the proposal.
The draft addresses what materials buildings should be made of, whether the standards should apply to the front, sides and back of buildings and what percentage of the vertical surface should be made of windows, among other guidelines.
Community Development Director Bob Graham said from visiting other cities, both large and small, he doesn’t think the standards are out of line.
They put developers on notice that the city has expectations. Usually developers ask if a city has a design ordinance.
At the end of the meeting, commissioners indicated they need to come back to the issue 12 months after it becomes effective to review its strong and weak points.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by hosta (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 7:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So, if they had a "design standard" when the downtown was built, would it be as interesting as it is today? Or would it be all "beige and conforming"??
Posted by snowbird1 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 10:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I guess if you have to go completely by what the city says then let them build the buildings and pay the costs that way they will get just what they want and not what the person paying & doing it would get. Give me a break. As long as it looks good and the way a person wants it that should be enough. I know there have to be rules but lets loosen up a little. I agree with hosta the buildings are what make our town different from a bunch of box like buildings in a row. Agree or disagree is entirely up to you I am not like the city and want everyone to agree with me.
Posted by metisman (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Would it be ok to put a rusty facade on a building that resembles the street lights that are supposed to attract people to AL?
Posted by Wildbill (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 1:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would be very imbarrassed to tell someone we have design standards in this town and then give them a tour of South Broadway from the railroad tracks to Healthreach. Also, take them by Albert Lea Lake area so they can see old sewage tanks and the 5 junked police cars near the lake.
I completely agree with the attempt to have a quality look to a town. we have to get this town straigtened out first.
We have to get jobs that produce more capital for people into this town.
Posted by Intheknow (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 4:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And how exactly will Bob Graham "count" the building design standard as a success? How will he know the number of businesses that didn't locate here or expand here because of overly precriptive design requirements?
Kind of like counting the number of jobs the stimulus bill "saved".
Posted by SunMan (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 5:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What would embarrass me, Wildbill is your inability to spell "imbarrassed"
It appears most of the local-yocals commenting against Albert Lea have rarely crawled out of their own hole, let alone crossed state lines.
The comments against Albert Lea working to better itself smack of ignorance, inexperience and permanent cynicism!
The culture of "no" and "cannot" and "will not" lives in the Albert Lea Tribune comment pages.
Let's hope the area leaders don't read your drivel.bility
Posted by Intheknow (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It is way too easy to dismiss anyone with even educated viewpoints as "negative" unless they agree with what is happening at city hall.
Why not consider that their and my viewpoint is also valid and perhaps could be useful to our current know-it-all city leaders.
Many of us are afraid to put our name on our posts or speak out at a meeting because we are then labeled as ignorant backward and negative.
So much for transparency and open dialogue in city hall.
Posted by GunnarBerg (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 7:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Please read the ordinance before you write something that may come across as....ah....stupid and uninformed?
Posted by metisman (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 9:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
A slide show of acceptable and unacceptable current AL buildings would be helpful for us ignorant griper types.
With that info I might be as informed and bright [doubtful, I know] as you other guys.
Posted by Intheknow (anonymous) on November 5, 2009 at 8:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The AL Trib did run a photo spread of newer buildings that the planning commission design standards would find unaceptable and it was ridiculous how many nice buildings didn't meet their "standards.". (Adam's accounting, Enger foot clinic, to name a couple)
The window requirements are particularly irksome in that they don't relate to a building's solar orientation. How many people would put that many windows on the north side of our homes?
As politically correct as these people are - they should address solar energy issues.
And where is city manager Vicotoria on this issue - or is she too busy "not spending money" on the Vitality project?
Posted by anasgrammy (anonymous) on November 5, 2009 at 8:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
variety is the spice of life. each business is individual and should be able to have its own look. how boring this town will be if all the businesses have to look alike or as someone thinks they should look. i've never once driven around town saying a business needs more windows or has too many signs in their windows. each business is individual and should be able to have it look as they think it should and not have to conform to what one small group of our leaders think they should.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)