Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – February 5, 2020 3 <br />5. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division <br />prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Applicant <br />shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including <br />but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County prior to <br />the start of any site activities. <br />6. Heavy duty silt fence and adequate erosion control around the entire construction site <br />shall be required and maintained by the Developer during construction to ensure that <br />sediment and storm water does not leave the project site. <br />7. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer <br />infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all <br />stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. <br />8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape financial security of $2,500 shall be <br />submitted. Landscape financial security shall be held for two full growing seasons. <br />9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a materials board to <br />be approved in writing by staff. <br />10. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be <br />shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush <br />lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be <br />shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. In addition, any lighting under <br />canopies (building entries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens. <br />Associate Planner Hartmann reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on <br />this matter: <br />1. Recommend Approval with Conditions <br />2. Recommend Approval as Submitted <br />3. Recommend Denial <br />4. Table <br /> <br />Chair Gehrig opened the floor to Commissioner comments. <br />Commissioner Lambeth asked if the applicant had provided staff with information regarding <br />the proposed truck movements and number of trucks that would be moving through the site. He <br />believed that the site was a little tight for the proposed truck movements. <br />Matt Ritton, Boston Scientific, explained the volume of trucks per day would be between zero <br />and five or six. He indicated this would be a very low volume dock compared to the other docks <br />at Boston Scientific. He noted this building expansion would have two bays for truck deliveries. <br />He stated he understood the turning radius was tight, but because the volume of trucks would be <br />quite low, he did not anticipate this would be a problem. <br />Commissioner Subramanian questioned why the applicant was proposing two more dock bays <br />if the truck volume would be low. <br />Mr. Ritton reported this dock was on the research facility and would be used for receiving. He <br />stated safety would be improved by adding this dock versus having on-grade deliveries. DRAFTAll light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be DRAFTAll light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be <br />pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush DRAFTpressure sodium lamps or LED and flush <br />lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be DRAFTlenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be <br />shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. In addition, any lighting under DRAFTshoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. In addition, any lighting under <br />ntries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens.DRAFTntries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens. <br />reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on DRAFTreviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on <br />1. Recommend Approval with Conditions DRAFT1. Recommend Approval with Conditions <br />2. Recommend Approval as Submitted DRAFT2. Recommend Approval as Submitted <br /> opened the floor to CDRAFT opened the floor to CommissionDRAFTommission <br />asked if the applicant had provided staff with information regarding DRAFTasked if the applicant had provided staff with information regarding