CCP 10-29-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.- . . ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 3, 2001 3 Mr. Kjersten addressed the wetland and power issue by explaining where the building would b"-]llacedin c()Iljunction with the lift station. He stated the lines would stay where they were. He pointed out where the wetlands would be located, and stated the project would not be in the wetlands. This project would not change the creek at all. With respect to the balconies, they were 11 inches deep. He stated by having non-functional balconies, this would eliminate cooking on the balconies, but it would still allow for airflow into the apartments. Ms. Bergman asked if there were any plans for development south of this development. Chair Baker replied at this time, they had not received any information regarding this. Mr. Parrish replied Bethel College did have options on one or more of the lots, but they did not have any information if the College intended on doing anything with those lots. Bruce Kunkel, Vice President Bethel College, replied the college did have options on three of the lots, but they were not sure what they would do with those lots. The lots were very wet and they were not sure what could be done with them. At the present time, they did not have any plans for them. A resident from 3777 New Brighton Road asked if any portion of this construction would be south of the drainage ditch. Chair Baker replied the drainage ditch was deeded to the City and was not contemplated to be a part ofthis development. Ms. Bergman stated she was not in favor of this development. Glenda Vohnan, 1881 Beckman, inquired about the parking issue. She asked if there would be any visitor parking. Mr. Kjersten stated there would be visitor parking, but it would not be overnight parking. All parking would be by permit. Commissioner Zimmerman asked about the splitting of the management responsibility between the developer and the College. Mr. Kjersten replied Bethel was responsible for all of the property management while it was in their control, but once their lease was up, the developer would take over control of the property. Commissioner Galatowitsch asked what type of students would be living in this development. Mr. Kunkel replied this would not be designated as freshman housing. However, there could be an "older" freshman living there. There could be some sophomores there, but it would be limited. It would be primarily for juniors and seniors, but not exclusively for them. He did not anticipate any married housing, except for the resident director, who lived on the site. Commissioner Galatowitsch asked if the signage would say Bethel College, or would it indicate it was private ownership. Mr. Kunkel stated they had not addressed this issue, but for security reasons, it would be best if they referred to this as apartments and not a part of the College. Commissioner Sand asked if all of the same rules that were on the College campus also applied to this development. Mr. Kunkel replied that was correct.