Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. Arden Hills Council 5 September 14, 1992 <br /> he is more comfortable with the site plan after revisions <br /> made at the ' 1 meeting than he was immediat.ely after <br /> speCJa. <br /> the regular Planning Commission meeting, <br /> Councilmember Mahowald stated that the one-Y.~ay traffic <br /> pattern around the building appears to be the most workable <br /> plan, though not idea 1 . Planner Bergly stated that the <br /> Planning Commission is more comfortable with the one-way <br /> design than any previous designs considered. <br /> Councilmember Mahowald asked for a review of the parking and <br /> landscaping plans, Regarding parking, planner Bergly <br /> explained that the existing parking is quite close to County <br /> Road E and is proposed to be moved further from the street, <br /> He illustrated the additional landscaping and lighting plans <br /> for the site and stated they appear suitable. <br /> Councilmember Mahowald asked if it would be appropriate to <br /> request the applicant attempt to acquire an egress from the <br /> adjacent property. Bergly reported that the applicant has <br /> approached the adjacent property owner in this regard, but <br /> the adjacent property owner is unwilling to provide the <br />. egressl and condemnation is not warranted, with regard to <br /> parking, Bergly added that the uses of the bank and the <br /> video store compliment each other in that peak bank traffic <br /> is expected at different hOUJ::s than peak video store <br /> traffic; the only heavy traffic hours for both might be <br /> Friday evenings. <br /> Councilmember Hicks stated that it may be to the adjacent <br /> property owner's advantage to provide an egress as it may <br /> encourage bank traffic to use the adjacent shopping center. <br /> Attorney Filla stated that the City can go on record <br /> requiring the applicant to provide an improved exit if an <br /> egress can be acquired from the adjacent property owner. <br /> Councilmember Malone expressed some concern regarding fire <br /> protection for the proposed building. He asked if the <br /> building is planned to De equipped ';.<ri th a spl:inkl ing system. <br /> Public Works Superintendent ( fonTiel.~ fiJ::e chief) \\!inkel <br /> pO~d!t.ed out. j,' concerns regarding :f:i r e protection: i . e. I <br /> ~,l S <br /> wi 11 the building be eq1)i~,ped wi th spl~inkl ing system?, 'i.Ji 11 <br /> t.r,t' c::t.i v<:"-t.bl:"ougr: be cat;OOgorizea -~ a gar3ge f',ti~lJctU):e? r <br /> 0._' <br /> will J:' ~ ~.l- " verdcles have adequate access to the <br /> !-lre plOLeel.lon <br /> building?, He offered to forward thosl? concerns to the Fire <br /> Chief, <br />. Peter Hilger ,stated that he believes the proposed <br /> reconstt'uction of the btlilding will actually provide an <br /> enhanced to the bld Iding in comoparision ' .' <br /> access to eXlsLlng <br /> conditions, <br />--------- <br />