12-06-1989 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting, 11-01-89 Page 3 CASE #88-30 (Cont'd) Bergly noted the architect worked with the lighting supplier to select fixtures that would satisfy the City's concern for spillover and safety. He identified the locations of the lights. • The Planner stated two area identifications signs are proposed; 1. A 2 ft. x 8 ft. , two sided sign located perpendicular to Parkshore Drive and placed in the center island at the entry. This sign will be illuminated with a 10-ft setback from the street right-of-way line and will be 3-1/2 feet high. 2. A one-sided sign, identical to the entrance sign, will be placed between Building 4 and I-694. This sign will be 30 feet from the right-of-way, the highest point of the landscape berm with 6-foot evergreens will provide the background for the sign, and an additional sign will be placed underneath this sign when vacancies occur in the apartment units. The sign ordinance permits two area identification signs on a PUD site and the signs proposed are below the maximum dimensional requirements outlined in the City Sign Ordinance; as noted on page 2 of the Planner's report. Bergly recommended approval of the three items as submitted, based on his analysis. George Winiecki, 4175 Highway 10, spoke in opposition to the proposed public pathway through this site. He stated his property is adjacent to this site and his concerns are as follows: 1. The public access would allow for persons to deviate from the pathway and cross his property; 2. Persons deviating from the pathway across his property may be injured on his property and 3. His insurance • rates may increase. He noted the City and the owner of the site would incur the same concerns if the pathway is dedicated as a public access. Winiecki also noted no public pathways were required on any other projects in this area. Clerk Administrator Berger advised the Park Director and Park Committee had discussed the proposed public access and did not favor a public pathway based on location of the path and traffic volumes on I-694. The Park Director suggested Park Dedication be adjacent to the existing parkland to the west of this site and this location could provide access to a pathway system around Round Lake in the future. Chairman Probst advised the Planning Commission concurred they would prefer to see the pathway dedicated for public use, however, the matter is not part of Commission action at this time. Zehm moved, seconded by Piotrowski, that Commission recommend to Council approval of the Landscape, Lighting and Signage Plan for Case #88-30, as proposed. Motion carried. (Zehm, Piotrowski, Probst, McGraw, Petersen and Ashbach voting in favor; Winiecki abstained) (6-0-1) CASE 89-18; SITE Planner Bergly reviewed his report of 11-1-89, relative PLAN REVIEW, ADDN. to the proposed locker room addition and connecting link MOUNDS VIEW H.S. at Mounds View Senior Highway School. Bergly advised the Special Use Permit for the Mounds View High School site Master Plan was approval in February 1984; a stipulation was attached that contemplated • site improvements that were consistent with the Master Plan would require only site plan review, rather than amending the SUP. He explained the current request is to add a 22 ft x 62 ft. extension to the boys' locker room and to add a 280 sq. ft. connecting link from the boys' locker room to the existing gym. Bergly outlined the area of the proposed addition on a diagram provided.