Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ORPJ" . <br /> Arden HilkJjannim~ Minutes Pal!e 2 03/01/95 .1 <br /> Mr. Bergly indicated the Concept Plan for this PUD was reviewed by the Planning Commission I <br /> in February and a brief review by City Council on February 28. After addressing issues raised, . <br /> the applicant has submitted revised plans for review as a combined PUD Master plan and Final <br /> Plan as authorized in Section V.L.s.a. of the Zoning Ordinance. On this site, a Comprehensive <br /> Plan Amendment should be undertaken to clarify the land use designation, which will be . <br /> addressed later this evening. <br /> Mr. Bergly indicated issues still to be resolved; the trail, the free standing garage, the cul-de-sac, I <br /> and the utility easement location. <br /> Mr. Bergly indicated staff would prefer the free standing garage to have a driveway turn around . <br /> and the doors face away from County Road E-2. <br /> Mr. Bergly noted several questions were raised regarding potential flooding problems. The City . <br /> Engineer has reviewed the plans and finds that water storage needs have been appropriately <br /> calculated. He indicated the basement floor elevation is 2.8 feet above the 100 year flood elevation <br /> of the on-site sediment basin. . <br /> Mr. Bergly stated the amount of required landscaping on site is 50 new trees. The landscape plan -. <br /> proposes large evergreens and a greater quantity of trees (71 instead of 50) to compensate for the <br /> larger required trees. In addition some large existing trees will be saved by using retaining walls <br /> and smaller trees will be moved on site as appropriate during site grading. I <br /> Mr. Bergly indicated with 6.49 acres and 18 units, the resulting gross density is 2.77 units per acre, <br /> with a net density of 2.87 until per acre. The ordinance allows a maximum density of 3.0 units I <br /> per acre in the R -1 district. <br /> Mr. Bergly noted last month there was discussion regarding the private street. The subdivision I <br /> ordinance in the City code has a section relating specifically to Planned Unit Developments. <br /> Section 22-12, b,(l), a, exempts a previous requirement (22-8,c,(lS) that does not allow private <br /> streets. Therefore, no variance is needed for the private streets. The street name, although I <br /> private, conflicts with a similar street name in the City and will have to be changed. <br /> Mr. Bergly noted some were concerned with the street width. A street width of 26 feet is I <br /> proposed whereas the minimum public street width normally is 32 feet. Parking on the 26 foot <br /> street would not be recommended. In lieu of street parking, a six car visitor parking area is I <br /> proposed near the center of the development. The City would encourage additional off street <br /> parking. <br /> Mr. Dan Ogren, the applicant, indicated he had grown up in Arden Hills and his daughters attend . <br /> Mounds View High School. He stated he had not planned this development lightly, he had ". <br /> reviewed the impact to the area, trying to keep as much of the natural beauty as possible. <br /> I <br />