My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-06-22-PC Minutes
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
PC Minutes 2022
>
07-06-22-PC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/4/2022 9:51:32 AM
Creation date
8/4/2022 9:51:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 – July 6, 2022 5 <br /> <br />Brian Wordaman, Civil Engineer with Kimley Horn, commented on the landscaping plan and <br />clarified this project met the City’s tree requirements. He reported the City required 16 trees and <br />he was proposing to plant 25 trees. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jefferys asked why so much flexibility was being requested for this project given <br />the fact it was new construction. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson explained he has done 70 to 75 site plans for this property trying to meet all of the <br />needs of the tenants. He stated he was not trying to get away with anything, but rather was <br />working to reasonably meet the needs of his tenants in order to move this project forward. He <br />believed he had done really well with this project and stated other projects had been considered <br />and approved by the City with more flexibility than he was requesting. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jefferys requested further information regarding signage. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson reported the multi-tenant building required no flexibility for the signage. He <br />commented further on the signage being requested for the car wash. <br /> <br />Commissioner Weber inquired if going to three tenants was an option versus having a car wash. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson stated this was not an option because the site did not have enough parking. <br /> <br />Commissioner Weber indicated he was not a huge fan of the car wash and would rather see two <br />multi-tenant buildings on this site. He suggested the applicant be required to pay a park <br />dedication fee because this request was not meeting the City’s landscaping requirements. He <br />asked how many employees were expected at the dental office. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson commented he was uncertain at this time but noted the dental tenant would be <br />Pacific Dental. <br /> <br />Commissioner Weber feared how the dental office employees and patients would impact the <br />parking situation on this site. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson indicated the dental use was aware of the parking available on the site. He believed <br />the proposed tenants were complimentary to one another and would have different peak use <br />times. He stated there was a delicate balance in order to have the right amount of parking for <br />multi-tenant buildings. <br /> <br />Commissioner Weber discussed how the County was working to add greenspace along the <br />sidewalks on Lexington Avenue. He requested further information regarding the signage on the <br />car wash. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson deferred this question to the Rocket Car Wash representatives. <br /> <br />Commissioner Mitchell stated she appreciated larger signs on local businesses because they <br />allowed passersby to see them from a safe distance. She asked if having a lot of glass on the car <br />wash was necessary given the nature of the business. She discussed how businesses were <br />moving to dynamic display signs, not only fast food establishments, but car washes too. She
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.