Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, May 9, 1988 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />CASE #88-11 (Cont'd) Moved by Hansen, seconded by Winiecki, that Council <br />approve Case No. 88-11, Site Plan Review and 12 foot <br />Front Setback Variance. Norwest llank, County Road E and Pine Tree Drive, based on <br />the fact the applicant has no alternatives for expansion, due to the narrow <br />parcel, the building design would not negatively impact the appearsnce of the <br />building from Pine Tree Drive, and, the applicant has agreed to soften the visual <br />impact be matching, as closely as possible, the size of the landscaping materials <br />to the existing landscaping on the site. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) <br /> <br />CASE #88-12; SITE <br />PL^N REVIEW FOR <br />MAINT. BLDG; BETHEL <br /> <br />Council was referred to Planner's report of $-4-88, <br />relative to the Site Plan Review for a Maintenance <br />lluilding at Bethel College. <br /> <br />The Planner advised the proposed building location conforms to the campus Master <br />Plan and the building would be effectively screened from Hamline Avenue by dense <br />trees and elevation change. <br /> <br />Bergly referred Council to the Planning Commission minutes of 5-4-88, <br />recommending approval of the metal storage building, contingent upon the <br />applicant working with the Planner to enhanced the landscape plan for Council <br />review this evening and that the existing wood storage building be painted the <br />same color as the proposed metal storage building. <br /> <br />Planner Bergly reported the revised landscape plan had been submitted by the <br />applicant; he noted the materials were larger in size and additional landscaping <br />along the entire front of the building was provided. It was Bergly's opinion the <br />revised landscape plan would provide sufficient screening for the residential <br />area to the south of the proposed building site, and he recommended approval of <br />the plan. <br /> <br />Hansen moved, seconded by Winiecki, that Council approve <br />Case No. 88-12, Site Plan Review for Maintenance lluilding, llethel College, <br />contingent upon the applicant conforming with the revised landscape plan <br />submitted $-9-88, and the existing wood storage building being painted the same <br />color as the proposed metal storage building. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) <br /> <br />CASE #88-01; MNDOT <br />TRUCK STA. SITE, <br />COUNTY ROAD I <br /> <br />Council was referred to Planner's report of $-4-88, <br />outlining minor changes in the MnDot site plan for the <br />truck station site on County Road I. <br /> <br />llergly advised the applicant requested a reduction in the length of the metal <br />cold storage building from 184 feet to 120 feet, and relocation of the new <br />driveway entrance 40 feet to the east of its approved location. He noted the <br />landscaping would be adjusted accordingly. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Council was referred to the Planning Commission minutes of 5-4-88, questioning if <br />exterior storage would continue, due to the reduction in building size. llergly <br />advised that MnDot representatives stated the reduction was due to limited <br />budget, and the building size was originally proposed for future needs. He noted <br />MnDot confirmed the current storage needs would be met and the reduced building <br />size would be sufficient to store equipment. <br /> <br />Winiecki moved. seconded by Sather, that Council approve <br />the Site Plan Revisions for Case No. 88-01. MnDot Truck Station Site on County <br />Road I, as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) <br /> <br />REPORT OF ENGINEER <br /> <br />DRAINAGE PROllLEMS; <br />ROYAL HILLS NORTH <br /> <br />Council was referred to the memoraqdum from Engineer <br />Barry Peters, 5-6-88, relative to the drainage problems <br />in the area of Royal Hills North. <br /> <br />Peters reported he had investigated three alternatives for correcting the <br />problem, as directed by Council at the 4-2$-88 meeting, and it was his <br />recommendation the first alternative, as outlined in his memorandum. be used to <br />correct the erosion of the drainage ditch. He further advised the City may choose <br />to do minor repair around the apron at this time. and do the actual ditch work in <br />the winter months, when there is frost in the ground. Peters noted the frost <br />would reduce damage to residents property when the work is being done. <br />