Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 7, 2000 <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />1. Enlarging and additional overhead dock doors. Staff would suggest the loading dock area <br />be allowed to have additional overhead dock doors and a change in size for the doors to be no <br />larger than 15 by 15 feet. <br /> <br />2. Installing drive-in ramps or platforms. Several requests have been for ramps and <br />platforms, The concerns that arise are the maneuverability of trucks around the ramps and <br />potential for exterior storage on platforms, The Zoning Ordinance does not allow exterior <br />storage. Staff has approved ramps and platforms in the past with the condition that there be <br />no exterior storage on the platform area, Staff would only consider ramps and platforms in <br />the loading dock area. <br /> <br />3. Installing windows or entry/emergency exit doors. Depending on the proposed layout of <br />the interior space, emergency doors are sometimes needed to meet the building code <br />requirements, Staff is comfortable with allowing emergency and entry exit doors as long as <br />the door(s) do not affect the aesthetic value of the building, lighting, and pedestrian traffic, <br /> <br />4. Increasing the percentage of the allowable office build-out square footage for each <br />property. The original proposal was to have 20 percent office/80 percent warehouse per <br />building. Staff has no problem increasing the office build-out for a particular tenant as long <br />as the building does not exceed 20 percent. The existing parking was setup for a maximum <br />of20 percent office, Currently the two buildings are owned by the same company. <br />However, if they were allowed to increase the percentage of office in one building due to <br />tenants in the other the City would run the risk of the buildings being sold. <br /> <br />5. Relocation and replacement or striping of additional parking spaces. A request to <br />relocate parking was made with the installation of the ramp for NSP. The City Engineer <br />reviewed the plan to relocate two parking spaces in the loading dock area.and staff approved <br />the modification. <br /> <br />Additional parking, however, may cause problems with traffic in the future. The reason for <br />the limitation on the amount of office allowed and, subsequently, the parking was due to the <br />proposed traffic counts for this area. <br /> <br />6. Exterior Lighting. Modifications to the lighting plan were discussed with a potential tenant <br />at one time. Staff is uncomfortable with this issue due to the large amount of discussion and <br />objection by residents during the original PUD process. <br /> <br />7. Exterior Storage. Staff has had several requests for exterior storage, such as the oxidizer <br />and storage tanks. Staff would suggest any exterior storage of equipment go through the full <br />PUD amendment process. <br /> <br />City Planner Chaput stated that Staff recommends approval of Planning Case 00-17b, Planned <br />Unit Development Amendment, to allow staff approval as presented in the "administrative <br />approval" section of the Staff report. <br /> <br />Donna Becker, Welsh Companies Representative, stated two potential tenants have brought <br />about this discussion for the City. She explained that as requested by staff, she was present to <br />address the Planning Commission to have administrative issues approved by Staff, Ms, Becker <br />noted she agreed to remove items six and seven from the approval list noting that exterior <br />