Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - mL Y 26, 1999 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />The gate on the east side does appear very different from the original rendering in the Master <br />Plan, When this gate was original approved, a control gate was discussed at Bethel Drive. When <br />the parking lot was constructed, the gate situation was evaluated, It was decided that a gate <br />would be placed at the parking lot. However, the applicant wanted to retain the option for a <br />future gate control off of the service drive, This would only occur if the applicant gained total <br />control of the service drive from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, <br /> <br />The applicant has obtained a permit for the placement of the proposed gate from the Minnesota <br />Department of Transportation, The applicant is also working with the Minnesota Department of <br />Transportation to have a portion of right-of-way turned over to Bethel College, <br /> <br />A condition was placed on the original approval of the east gate that, if Bethel College relocates <br />the gate to the intersection of the service drive, then a modification of the south comer of the <br />parking lot would be required to allow a second access point for better circulation, At this time, <br />the entrance to the parking lot only accommodates one car in and out. Having two entrances will <br />increase this flow, <br /> <br />Bethel College does use this parking lot at all times of the day and the reason for the placement <br />of the gate as proposed by the applicant was for more security in this area, not only for the <br />storage area, but also for the parking lot area as well, <br /> <br />The staff had three concerns with the proposed gate at the east entrance, The first concern was <br />that it might cause a problem for motorists that are not familiar with the gate location when the <br />gate is closed between II :00 p,m, and 6:00 a,m, A motorist may not realize the gate is closed <br />and may have difficulty turning around, The applicant has provided analysis showing that a <br />passenger vehicle will be able to stop and turn back onto Highway 51 after seeing that the gate is <br />closed, Additionally, there is a deceleration lane when approaching the gate, <br /> <br />The proposed gate will reduce the width of the drive at the corner to approximately 20 feet where <br />24 feet is required, Therefore, cars may have difficulty passing in this location, The applicant <br />had agreed to expand this drive to 24 feet by cutting the comer. <br /> <br />The third concern was that the location of the gate does not conform with the Master Plan <br />location, With the proposed location, there is only enough stacking space for one car before <br />blocking the service drive, <br /> <br />Staff had proposed an alternative to the Planning Commission for the east gate location, By <br />relocating the service drive, there would be more distance to allow stacking of traffic coming and <br />going, The gate would be moved back farther to allow more time for motorists to realize the gate <br />is closed and allow more space to turn around and re-enter Highway 51. This option would also <br />alleviate the distance problem, <br /> <br />The Planning Commission recommended approval of the gate area by widening the drive to 24 <br />feet, The applicant had expressed concern regarding the steep slope in this location and building <br />this up may be difficult, The applicant was comfortable with cutting the corner to widen the <br />