Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 7,1999 <br /> <br />~~~~y <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand referred to the Staff's concern regarding the layout of the proposed parking tit <br />lot markings and the potential for congestion. He asked if the College had discussed this issue <br />with the Engineer in order to alleviate the potential congestion. Mr. Hjelle stated that the <br />Engineer had been contacted and will review the parking lot markings. He noted that this needs <br />to be carefully reviewed since markings need to be in place. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand noted that the drawing of the proposed parking lot does not appear to <br />include handicap spaces. He asked if this is correct. Mr. Hjelle stated that this was correct. <br />Commissioner Sand asked if handicap-parking spaces are required. Mr. Hjelle stated that this <br />issue would have ,to be reviewed with the City Staff. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand stated he would assume that, any time a parking lot of this size is <br />constructed, the State Building Code and related handicap provisions would mandate a certain <br />number of handicap spaces. Mr. Ringwald stated that this was correct and that Staff would <br />review this issue. <br /> <br />With regard to the steep driveway, Commissioner Nelson asked if the College's Engineer had <br />reviewed the drawing. Ms. Randall stated that the Engineer had reviewed the drawing and had <br />commented that, although it was steep, it could be maintained. <br /> <br />Commissioner Nelson noted that this would be a steep roadway for the northern climate and <br />asked the applicant ifhe felt this would be a concern. Mr. Hjelle stated that this was a valid <br />concern and he would raise this question to the Engineer. He indicated that he was not sure what ... <br />the exact grade would be. .. <br /> <br />Chair Erickson asked what the current time frame is for the revision of the circular drive. Mr. <br />Hjelle stated that this is a funding issue. He indicated that the College had hoped it would be <br />accomplished prior to the opening of the new dorm; however, this will most likely not happen. <br />He stated that the time frame might be approximately three to five years. <br /> <br />Chair Erickson stated that this would be an issue with regard to the access to the parking lot as <br />the steep road may affect access to the circular drive. He suggested the possibility of changing <br />the access to the lot at the upper level from the east rather than the south. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rye asked what the City's authority level is with regard to design standards of <br />internal roadway systems. She indicated that there are standards for the City streets and these <br />standards do not necessarily have to be followed for a private road. <br /> <br />Mr. Ringwald added that, although this development involves private streets, the public uses the <br />streets. Therefore, it would be within the City's authority to request a review of the <br />appropriateness of the circulation and grade of the parking lot and require a statement from a <br />professional engineer indicating why they have concluded that the parking lot can operate safely. <br /> <br />Chair Erickson asked if the footprint of the proposed parking lot would be the same as the <br />existing tennis courts. Ms. Randall stated that it would be. The only difference would be the ... <br />addition of a roadway from the existing parking lot to the tennis court area. .. <br /> <br />Chair Erickson stated that the impact of the parking lot on the neighborhood would be minimal <br />as it would be internal to the site. He indicated that he uses the campus on occasion and there is <br />