My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-29-16-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
02-29-16-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2016 3:38:19 PM
Creation date
2/26/2016 3:36:44 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
336
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
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – February 3, 2016 4 <br /> <br />11. A building permit shall be required for the retaining wall and fence adjacent to the <br />sidewalk connection to Building 14. A structural analysis of the retaining wall shall be <br />provided to show, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, that there are no issues with the <br />construction of the retaining wall on top of the existing sanitary sewer line. <br />12. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits, including, but not limited to, NPDES and <br />Rice Creek Watershed District. Copies of all necessary permits shall be submitted to the <br />City prior to the issuance of any development permits. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this <br />matter: <br /> <br />1. Recommend Approval with Conditions <br />2. Recommend Approval as Submitted. <br />3. Recommend Denial <br />4. Table <br /> <br />Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson indicated that the parking deficit was based on the City’s requirements but <br />noted Boston Scientific has provided proof of parking. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler reported this was the case. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson asked if there would be an external staircase that would provide access to the <br />skyway. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler noted that the skyway would be accessed from inside Building 3 and <br />Building 10. He indicated there would be an at-grade entrance to the skyway on the west side of <br />Innovation Way. He explained there would be no external staircase that would provide access to <br />the skyway. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson questioned if staff had any concerns with a skyway spanning Innovation Way. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler stated that adequate clear height would be maintained for emergency <br />vehicles and noted the plans had been reviewed by the Lake Johanna Fire Department and the <br />City Engineer. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson inquired if the applicant had any concerns with the staff recommended <br />conditions. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler stated that no concerns have been raised at this time. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jones asked if the existing at-grade pedestrian walkway would be demolished <br />after the skyway was complete. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler indicated this was the case. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.