3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

•: ?rivri BROOKSTONE,INC. • 7400 Metro Blvd.,Suite 212 Edina,Minnesota 55439 Tuesday,November 14,2000 612.837.9167 phone 612.837.8010 fax Ms. Michele McPherson Director of Planning,City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway PO Box 490 Elk River,Minnesota 55330 Dear Michele: I appreciate the opportunity that Tom Schock,of Griffin Companies,and I had to meet with Cathy Mehelich, Mark Nevinski,and yourself,to discuss the Elk River Business Park. We are excited about finally having broken ground on this project and working with you in making this a successful project for both of us. In our meeting,you indicated that the City of Elk River has adopted several amendments to the zoning ordinance that affect our property. We were not aware that this was happening and hence,have some concern with a few of the changes in that they would have a very significant impact on our ability to market the space, which we have currently constructed,and the balance of the park. Let me say,firstly,that we are in full support of all reasonable attempts to ensure the highest level of aesthetic • quality possible. We,of course,have to balance that with economic factors and have to compete with the _ neighboring market area. We are requesting modification in the following areas to address our concerns. We,again,are not.trying'to compromise quality. We sincerely believe that,if you look at any number of business parks throughout the twin cities,especially those developed and with buildings constructed during the 1990's,you will find that considerable use of materials as the dominant design on front faces of buildings are significantly limited in your revised ordinance. Our specific request for modifications follows below: 1. We believe and are requesting that exposed aggregate concrete panels,burnished concrete block, exposed aggregate concrete block,architecturally treated cast in placed concrete panels,artificial stucco (EIFS)and artificial stone should be Class I materials. We are in concurrence that a plain,raked or smooth panel should not be a Class I material. As it currently reads,the only affordable Class I material is the integral colored,split faced block;and in the opinion of our architects,this in an inferior product to the pre-cast panels in terms of long-term building durability and general aesthetic appeal. Pre-cast material is a superior insulator and provides a better moisture resistant wall than a block building. While there has been some use of rock faced block,it is not common as a primary material. During the 1990's a significant number of industrial buildings and business parks have utilized,as a dominant material,the pre-cast alternatives you have classified as Class II. We are equally concerned with the requirement that walls not facing public rights-of-way,etc.cannot be constructed of more than 60% Class II materials. This would mean,for example,that at least 40%of a loading dock wall would have to be constructed of Class I materials. This would not only destroy the economics of most potential projects but also be inconsistent with standards in place throughout Twin Cities industrial park areas. • 2. We are,for obvious reasons,quite concerned with making any use utilizing more than 30%warehouse space as a conditional use. Our building and future buildings are general office/warehouse buildings with the warehouse to be utilized for a variety of industrial uses including light manufacturing,service, storage,R&D,etc. We can understand your concern for having truck terminals in business park REAL ESTATE ADVISORY SERVICES,INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT