Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 4, 2005 4 <br />. Mr. Hellegers stated applicant was requesting a lO-foot side yard setback to allow the <br /> existing home to remain compliant with City Code while allowing for the expansion of <br /> Lexington Avenue, for the property located at 1105 Amble Drive in Arden Hills. Staff <br /> recommended approval of the request. <br /> Commissioner Larson asked if the evergreen trees would need to be removed and if so, <br /> would the trees be relocated. Mr. Hellegers replied when Ramsey County went in to <br /> widen the project, they would have prepared an assessment as to what was there and the <br /> property owners would be compensated for the loss of the trees. <br /> Chair Sand asked if the easement being taken by the County was an existing easement or <br /> was this additional property for highway purposes. Mr. Hellegers replied this was <br /> beyond the existing right-{)f-way and this was new easement because of the addition of <br /> the turn lane. <br /> Chair Sand asked what jurisdiction did the County have in taking this easement. Mr. <br /> Hellegers replied the County could condemn the property, but the County tried to work <br /> this out with the property owners and compensate the owners for the loss. <br /> Chair Sand asked if the temporary easement was a construction easement. Mr. Hellegers <br /> replied that was correct. <br />. Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. <br /> Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the variance to come forward and make <br /> comment. <br /> Greg and Jean Peterson, 1105 Amble Drivc. Mr. Peterson stated he was concerned with <br /> this request. He noted right now the road being proposcd was going to be as wide as a <br /> freeway with two lanes running both north and south and the ten feet of his additional <br /> easement would make another lane, as well as the median and another turn lane on the <br /> south side of the street. He indicated this was turning into a wide street and expressed <br /> concern about additional noise. He noted his large pine trees would be removed and not <br /> replaced. He stated this was a residential property and not a commercial property and <br /> they would be living very close to an extremely busy street. He expressed concern about <br /> a decrease in property value to his home by living on this busy street. He asked if all of <br /> the utilities were being moved closer to his property and if those easements would also <br /> move closer to his property. <br /> Commissioner Modesette asked if Mr. Peterson if had been given any infotmation as to <br /> what utility easement would be. Mr. Peterson responded he had not received much <br /> information and he had not been given a guarantee of any fence or wall. <br /> Commissioner Bezdicek asked if Mr. Peterson had consummated his agreement with the <br />. County. Mr. Peterson replied they had not and the County had not at this point given <br /> them sufficient details, but the County had described the process. <br />---.- <br />