Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 1,2005 I2 <br /> safety with respect to traffic for the residents on Keithson Drive and the townhomes. He <br />. expressed concern about having two "U" turns in this area. He noted this was not only <br /> dangerous, but it was a major imposition for the people coming out of Keithson Drive. <br /> He indicated he did not accept the traffic report because that engineer did not "live with <br /> this traffic experience". He stated this was a major safety concern and he did not <br /> understand why the County would accept a "U" turn on Hamline and then another "U" <br /> turn up the road. He noted Mounds View High School used this area as a major <br /> thoroughfare to getting to school. He stated he wanted a cut-through in the island so a <br /> "U" turn was not necessary. He also suggested they turn the buildings 26-30 to face the <br /> parking lot and eliminate the road onto Hamline. He stated it was the people who made <br /> Arden Hills and it was the people who had to stay in the City, not the businesses. <br /> John Lawyer, 4539 Keithson Drive, stated he had lived in his home since 1977. He <br /> indicated he did not oppose the development, but would like to see it better insulated <br /> from the neighborhood so it did not disturb the quality of neighborhood life. He <br /> expressed concern about the pedestrian trail to the west of the property and t4at it not take <br /> the appearance of an alley way. He indicated they used the trail at least twite a day. He <br /> expressed concern about the fenced in trash dumpster and the brick wall of the <br /> westernmost units of the development, which was 10 feet from the edge of the foot trail. <br /> He suggested a berm along the western side. He requested the trash dumpster be located <br /> somewhere other than the western edge of the property. He expressed concern about the <br /> possibility of retail space in this development. He suggested they consider eliminating <br /> the possibility of retail space in this development. <br />. Cindy Owen, 4490 Hamline Avenue North, stated she lived one block south of Highway <br /> 96 and had lived in her home for seven ycars. She stated she had a teenage son who was <br /> going to Mounds View High School next year. She expressed concern about the traffic <br /> on the road and the noise that was generated by the traffic. She expressed concern about <br /> the safety of the kids that were waiting at the bus stops. She also expressed concern <br /> about the speed the County Sheriff uses on Hamline A venue. <br /> James Pinckney, I425 Arden View Drive, stated there appeared to be four areas of non- <br /> compliance in this development, and he did not see any variances from the developer. He <br /> asked for justification from the developer as to these non-compliances. He asked if the <br /> developer had looked at all of the possibilities for landscaping. He expressed concern <br /> about the traffic study and the potential future and existing traffic problems. He stated <br /> traffic from the TCAAP project was just starting to build and he believed Guidant was <br /> less than half way into their expansion and hiring for a significant expansion of their <br /> facility. He believed the traffic study was flawed and it appeared to him that there were <br /> big issues related to this. He asked if a modification to Highway 96 was a possibility to <br /> allow better access. He acknowledged there will be an increase in traffic in the City in <br /> the next five years, but he was concerned they were not addressing two major projects <br /> that added to the traffic right now (TCAAP and Guidant). <br /> Jim Clark, 4528 Keithson Drive, expressed concern about the traffic. He asked them to <br />. take into consideration the winter months and the blind spot on the road. He believed <br /> there would be an increase in traffic accidents in the area with this development. He <br /> stated he liked the nice, low profile of the buildings on the north side of Highway 96 off <br /> of Hamline and suggested they have low profile buildings in this development also. He <br /> noted in the future he believed Hamline would be generating considerable more traffic <br />