CC 02-26-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - FEBRUARY 26,2001 8 . The application met the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance; and The Special Use Permit application, as required for drive-in businesses, gives the City the opportunity to review and address any future potential problems on the property on an ongoing basis. . . Special Use Permit/Site Plan Review The applicant requested a special use permit (SUP) for a drive-in business (as required by Zoning Ordinance Section 6 (D)) and a site plan review for a Walgreens. The application met all of the minimum dimensional requirements (lot area, size, setbacks), lot coverage, floor area ratio, landscape lot area, building height, parking requirements and aesthetics. The grading and utilities plan was reviewed by the City Engineer and comments have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. The Ordinance requires that drive-in businesses have two accesses to public streets (Section 6 (D)#2 (h)), which it does, plus a third requiring a permanent access easement through the Holiday Inn parcel. Ramsey County had confirmed their preference for the access through the Holiday Inn parcel for better access to and from County Road E. . Mr. Lynch explained that the majority of the discussion of this application at the Planning Commission focussed around the impact of this business on traffic and the designation of this parcel as a "Community Gateway" as it related to signage requirements. Commissioner Sand submitted a memorandum to the Planning Commission, addressing his concerns regarding the proposal as it related to community gateways in the City. Mr. Lynch advised that the applicant hired URS/BRW to complete a traffic study for the impacts of the proposed Walgreens on the Lexington Avenue/County Road E area. The study illustrates that the proposed changes to County Road E would actually improve the intersection and traffic flow, even with the addition of a Walgreens store at this location. Mr. Lynch noted the Sign Ordinance permits one freestanding sign and one wall mounted business sign per frontage on a public street. The proposed freestanding sign met the Sign Ordinance requirements, whereas the wall mounted signs must be adjusted to not be higher than 16 feet in height at the top of the sign. Significant discussion took place around a gateway sign for the City at this location. Mr. Lynch noted that the November 1998 Comprehensive Plan update identified "Community Gateways" in Figure 7.1, Road Classifications. This map, as adopted, did not match the identified "Community Gateways" in the 1985 Parkway System Feasibility Study. The Parkway System Feasibility Study amended the 1980 Comprehensive Plan, which was completely redone in the 1998 update. The Comprehensive Plan, as updated, did not identify the comer of Lexington Avenue and County Road E as a "Community Gateway". The Planning Commission had directed staff to amend the Comprehensive Plan through the proper procedures to correct the map. . Mr. Lynch explained that although this property was not formally designated as a "Community Gateway" by the last adopted plan, the applicant had attempted to incorporate the landscaping