CCP 08-09-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. e . DRAFT ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JULY 26,1999 3 The gate on the east side does appear very different from the original rendering in the Master Plan. When this gate was original approved, a control gate was discussed at Bethel Drive. When the parking lot was constructed, the gate situation was evaluated. It was decided that a gate would be placed at the parking lot. However, the applicant wanted to retain the option for a future gate control off of the service drive. This would only occur ifthe applicant gained total control of the service drive from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The applicant has obtained a permit for the placement of the proposed gate from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The applicant is also working with the Minnesota Department of Transportation to have a portion of right-of-way turned over to Bethel College. A condition was placed on the original approval of the east gate that, if Bethel College relocates the gate to the intersection of the service drive, then a modification of the south corner of the parking lot would be required to allow a second access point for better circulation. At this time, the entrance to the parking lot only accommodates one car in and out. Having two entrances will increase this flow. Bethel College does use this parking lot at all times of the day and the reason for the placement of the gate as proposed by the applicant was for more security in this area, not only for the storage area, but also for the parking lot area as well. The staff had three concerns with the proposed gate at the east entrance. The first concern was that it might cause a problem for motorists that are not familiar with the gate location when the gate is closed between 11 :00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. A motorist may not realize the gate is closed and may have difficulty turning around. The applicant has provided analysis showing that a passenger vehicle will be able to stop and turn back onto Highway 51 after seeing that the gate is closed. Additionally, there is a deceleration lane when approaching the gate. The proposed gate will reduce the width of the drive at the comer to approximately 20 feet where 24 feet is required. Therefore, cars may have difficulty passing in this location. The applicant had agreed to expand this drive to 24 feet by cutting the corner. The third concern was that the location of the gate does not conform with the Master Plan location. With the proposed location, there is only enough stacking space for one car before blocking the service drive. Staff had proposed an alternative to the Planning Commission for the east gate location. By relocating the service drive, there would be more distance to allow stacking of traffic coming and going. The gate would be moved back farther to allow more time for motorists to realize the gate is closed and allow more space to turn around and re-enter Highway 51. This option would also alleviate the distance problem. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the gate area by widening the drive to 24 feet. The applicant had expressed concern regarding the steep slope in this location and building this up may be difficult. The applicant was comfortable with cutting the corner to widen the