Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.--~-~ <br /> <br />.J, <br /> <br />~~~ <br />\\Iaee[u\ ~\ <br />~- <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />~~ '-~-;'~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr Aaron Parrish <br />City of Arden Hills <br />1245 West Highway 96 <br />Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794 <br /> <br />November 23, 2001 <br /> <br />Dear Mr Parrish, <br /> <br />The development proposed at the comer of Cleveland Avenue and County Rd E2 has <br />fostered significant discussion. In light of the letter you and the City Council received <br />via fax on November 13th from Beacon Construction, I am compelled to clarifY my <br />personal position on this matter. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />In my opinion, the real issues are more about timing and information than trees and <br />traffic. True, altering the site after so many years would have a big emotional impact on <br />people in the neighborhood. Respecting that, I also respect a property owner's right to <br />propose development as they see fit. Discussion on vegetation should not be construed as <br />something on which common ground cannot be found. Additional traffic generated by a <br />project ofthis size is not expected to hinder obtaining the necessary road access permit <br />from Ramsey County, either. The existing traffic problem is not the project's to solve. <br />However, citizen concern for safety and congestion at the intersection is valid and will <br />remain an open issue until addressed through other channels. (Construction of walking <br />paths would be a big step toward addressing pedestrian safety in the neighborhood.) <br /> <br />With that said, I reiterate my concerns. <br /> <br />I) That due diligence be included as part of the review process. Unfortunately, that could <br />delay the construction schedule. I understand Beacon and Bethel's concern for time, but <br />their focus on schedule as the critical path leaves me uneasy. Whatever is constructed <br />will be there for many years. <br /> <br />2) A comer property has very high visibility. I think that raises the bar, aesthetically and <br />functionally, for any project. To desire a better understanding ofthe development is <br />reasonable. Projects can benefit from an iterative process and initial proposals often <br />include some wiggle room for accommodating change. That building height and parking <br />exceed current code signal additional scrutiny. <br /> <br />3) Knowledge of impact on the wetland is a high priority regardless of which property is <br />proposed for development or who owns it. Given that Rice Creek Watershed has granted <br />preliminary permit approval for this project, we trust that wetland issues will be handled <br />appropriately. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Page 1 <br />