CC 02-08-1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes 0L the Regular Lounc11 Meeting, February 8, 1988 Page 2 . " CASE #88-01 (Cont'd) Hansen moved, seconded by Winiecki, that Council initiate the Rezoning from R-1 to 1-2 of the property outlined by the Planner, and that a public hearing be held on this mat$er at the Regular Council Meeting of March 14, 1988, at the Village Hall. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) DRIVEWAY WIDTH REQUIREMENTS Council was rsferred to Planning Commission minutae of 2-3-88; regarding permitted drivewsy widths as required by State, County and Arden Hills standards. Bergly advised the Planning Commission had discussed the conflict between Arden Hills Zoning Code required driveway widths and those required by the State and County; he advised he had discussed the survey results with the traffic consultant at SEH and both concurred it would be more appropriate for the City to adopt the aame ragulationa aa tha County and Stata. . The Planner Commission has recommended Council initiate action to amend the Zoning Ordinance to include the driveway width recommendations, as outlined in the Planner's report of 2-3-88 and made part of the Planning Commies ion minutes of 2-3-88; he advised this would require a public hearing. Council 4uggested that the Attorney review the proposed amendment. Sather moved, seconded by Hansen, that the Village Attorney be directed to draft an amendment to the Zoning Ordinence for Council review, which includes the recommended changes in driveway widths in the City, as outlined in the Planner's memorandum of 2-3-88 and recommended by Planning COmmission at their meeting of 2-3-88. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) CASE #88-02; SITE REVIEW, AMER. FAM. INS., NORTHWOODS Council was referred to Planning Commission minutes, 2-3-88 and Planner'e memorandum of 2-3-88; regarding the Site Plan Review for the propoeed American Family Insurance Claim Center, to be.located on Parcel A, Lot 2 I, of the Northwoods Development, Northwoods Drive. . Block Planner Bergly explained the City had reviewed the Development Plan for Northwoods Development in 1985; a redivision of one of the lots and a concept development plan were approved in the fall of 1987, Parcel A was propoeed for the claims center and Parcel B was proposed for s daycare center and office building or the office building only. Bergly advised the claims center site plan was slightlY'modified from the original concept plan submitted; he noted the relocation of the drive-thru claims improves the traffic circulation pattern on the eite. He stated the site plan eubmitted is in compliance with all ordinance requirements and the building plan, landscape plan and signage are well done. Bergly noted applicant has bermed the entire eaet, south and a portion of the west area of the site, as well ss provided effective screening by landscaping on top of the berm. The Planner explained there was a slight problem with the mechanical equipment, 4It located on the side of the building, there was not enough space provided to a ecreened wall around the equipment and still have enough room for proper air circulation around the mechanical units. He advised the berm was extended and landscaping provided around the equipment to screen the units from view into the site. Bergly advised the Planning Commission had recommended Council approval. subject to the Engineer's review and approval of the drainage plan and the applicant submission of a landscape bond. Bob Worthington, representing Opus Corporation, was present and displayed drawings of the building exterior and interior; he explained the building would be one story, all brick veneer, tinted glass and be compatible with the completed Phase I office building at 3900 Northwoods Drive. Worthington reviewed the interior floor plan and stated vehicles brought to the claims center for examination would not be stored at the site; he stated only passenger vehicles would be viewed at the center,' no heavy equipment vehicles. Councilwoman Winiecki questioned if vehicles would be towed to the center for examination; if so, how many. .