My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 12-11-1989
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
CC 12-11-1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:13:08 PM
Creation date
11/10/2006 3:22:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 12-11-89 <br /> Page 3 <br /> CASE #89-22 (Cont'd) Planner Bergly explained Council had reviewed a Master <br /> plan for this site earlier this year with major buildings <br /> located on the site. He advised at this time the application is proposing to <br /> . construct a 41 x 47 ft. storage building to be attached to the south side of the <br /> south building on Hamline Avenue. <br /> The Planner reviewed the placement and visibility of the proposed addition from <br /> Hamline Avenue and County Road F; the addition will not be visible from either <br /> street. He stated no additional parking will be required as this addition is a <br /> storage facility. <br /> Bergly noted Rice Creek Watershed District review is required due to existing <br /> wetlands on this site. He explained site grading is minimal, no landscaping is <br /> required and no drives/surface improvements will be made in conjunction with the <br /> building addition. <br /> Council questioned if the building will be visible from the north facing the <br /> residential area and if emergency vehicle access will be a problem. <br /> Bergly advised the building should not be visible from the north due to other <br /> buildings on the site and dense trees/vegetation in that area. <br /> Fire Chief Winkel stated he has no concerns relative to emergency vehicle access; <br /> sufficient access is provided along the south and west of the buildings. <br /> Bergly advised the Planning Commission recommended approval, condition upon RCWD <br /> and the Engineer's approval of the grading/drainage plan. <br /> . Malone moved, seconded by Mahowald, to approve CASE <br /> #89-22, Site Plan Review for Minor Construction, 4100 Hamline Avenue, Cardiac <br /> Pacemakers, Inc., subject to grading and drainage plan approval from the Rice <br /> Creek Watershed District and City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) <br /> CASE #88-14; SIGN Council was referred to the Planner's report and Planning <br /> PERMIT, GOODYEAR Minutes dated 12-6-89, relative to the application for a <br /> SERVICE CENTER, Sign Permit from Goodyear Service Center, Lexington <br /> LEXINGTON AVENUE Avenue. <br /> Planner Bergly explained the applicant has submitted a revised application that <br /> meets all ordinance requirements. He advised there was substantial discussion of <br /> the signs at the Planning meeting and the Commission recommendation for approval <br /> was based on the applicant consolidation and placement of the two (2) signs as <br /> shown in the revised plan. <br /> Bergly reviewed the four considerations listed in his revised report dated <br /> 12-11-89; summarized that both signs as shown on the revised plan meet all <br /> ordinance regulations. <br /> Growe moved, seconded by Hansen, to approve Case #88-14, <br /> Sign Permit and Signage Plan for two (2) signs, as revised and attached to the <br /> Planner's report dated 12-11-89, Goodyear Service Center and Arden Hills Tire <br /> Center, Lexington Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) <br /> . SIGNALIZATION; Council was referred to a report from the Clerk <br /> LEXINGTON AVE., Administrator dated 11-30-89, regarding the Lexington <br /> COUNTY RD. E Avenue/County Road E signalization agreements. <br /> Engineer Maurer eXplained he has reviewed all the agreements and the costs <br /> included are the same as those presented at the preliminary stage. He stated the <br /> Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption (EVP) system is also included, as requested by <br /> Council, in the amount of $26,990.00. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.