01-02-1989 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Planning Commission Meeting, February 1, 1989 Page 4 CASE #88-30 (Cont'd) Member Winiecki expressed concern relative to traffic. She stated a luxury type complex, in keeping with the quality development which currently exists in the area, would be her preference. • Winiecki noted that the Parkshore apartments did not attract families with small children. Winiecki favored a change in density; she suggested a reduction in the park land dedication and an increase in area separating the proposed buildings. Member Zehm preferred additional parking per unit; she favored 2.5 spaces per unit. She agreed that a larger separation between buildings would be favorable. Member Woodburn asked if there would be sufficient access for fire/emergency vehicles. Bergly advised the Fire and Police representatives would review the plan and make recommendations for emergency vehicle access. Bergly noted the parking meets minimum requirements and 2 spaces per unit is commonly required. He suggested an area could be identified for expansion if additional parking were required. There was discussion relative to the density calculations and the definition of net acres; Woodburn argued the density calculation is closer to 9 or 10 units per acre. Planner Bergly advised that normally a PUD allows for flexibility between the R-3 and R-4 density. • Members Ashbach and Carlson expressed concern relative to traffic and Carlson preferred underground parking. Member Petersen stated the building design was attractive and he favored a traffic study for the proposed development. Probst and Piotrowski stated no objections to the project; favored a traffic study and suggested the parking issue be reviewed. Bergly stated it is common to have several different densities in a PUD; it was his opinion if the single family unit remains as such, the overall density will be established. Chairman Probst and other Commission members agreed that the plan arrangement for 16 unit apartments was generally acceptable. Petersen moved, seconded by Carlson, that Commission recommend to Council approval of the Concept Plan for PUD of less than 10 units per net acre, Case #88-30, Continental Development Corporation, contingent upon: 1. The applicant submitting a parking plan to provide 2 parking spaces per unit, one parking space per unit blacktopped, and showing an area identified to accommodate additional parking if deemed necessary in the future. 2. A traffic study be completed to address potential impact on Old Highway 10, including the intersection of Highway 10 and 96. Motion carried. (Petersen, Carlson, Probst, Martin, McGraw, Piotrowski, Zehm and Ashbach voting in favor; Winiecki abstained) (8-0-1)