CCP 04-30-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—APRIL 4, 2001 8 Commissioner Erickson stated he would like to see a more permanent structure. Ms. Oertli agreed and stated she would want to obtain estimates for alternative enclosures. Commissioner Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to table this item to allow the owners an opportunity to modify their request, taking into consideration the Commission's suggestions/recommendations. The motion carried unanimously(7-0). PLANNING CASE #01-09 — GUIDANT CORPORATION — 4100 HAMLINE AVENUE — MASTER PUD AMENDMENT/SITE PLAN REVIEW—PUBLIC HEARING Chair Baker opened the public hearing at 8:42 p.m. Ms. Chaput explained the applicant was requesting a final plat of the Morris Communications property, located in the Northeast quadrant of I-694 and I-35W. Ms. Chaput stated the City Council approved the preliminary plat of the Morris Communications property in January, 2001. The preliminary plat met all of the requirements of the City Code and created one developable lot (which is actually, by plat, three lots due to the railway intersection and the road easement) and two outlots for the existing billboards. Following approval of a preliminary plat, the applicant had three months to file a final plat application with the City. The purpose of the final plat application was to incorporate any changes that the City Council required during the preliminary plat phase. There were no changes required at that time so this was just a procedural application. Ms. Chaput explained as a part of the final plat application, a vacation of easements application had been made as well. The Morris Communications property had two road easements in favor of the City of Arden Hills at this time. In order to file for final plat, the State Statutes required that the easements be vacated by the City and be dedicated back to the City. Submitted as part of the application are copies of easement documents 1688078, 1719279, 1832660, and 2110427. Ms. Chaput reviewed by final plat and vacation of easement by explaining Section 22-7 of the City Code outlines the necessary date for a final plat application. The requirements are general, regarding how the final plat should be created, all of which are met by the submitted final plat map. The final plat does not deviate from what was approved on the preliminary plat by the City Council. The City currently had two road easements on the property: 3ra Avenue NE; and 13th Street NE. As stated by the applicant, the easements needed to be vacated by the City and then dedicated back to the City as required by State Statute and for ease of later platting of the property. Since this was not staff s area of expertise nor was it that of the City Engineer's, the City Engineer had the application reviewed by a registered land surveyor within his office. The land surveyor commented that the dedication agreed with the existing easement documents for both streets. There was additional right-of-way on the east side of the dedicated right-of-way shown on the plat for 3rd Avenue. There was a question of whether this should have been added into the dedication on the plat.