Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, . <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 2,2002 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />etc. on Guidant Drive were in place. He indicated Fernwood would probably be . <br />reconstructed in phases; it would not happen all at once. <br /> <br />CoInrtlissioner Ricke asked if they would need an updated traffic study at the end of <br />Phase 2. Mr. Parrish replied they could do a traffic study at the end of each phase if the <br />CoInrtlission wanted, and this could be made as a condition. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ricke asked if Guidant could build trails on the campus, instead of a <br />monetary park dedication. Mr. Reimer replied there were some trails in place now, and <br />they were considering adding additional trails on the campus. He stated they were <br />working with staff and the Parks Department on this issue. <br /> <br />Chair Sand invited the public to make comment. <br /> <br />Jim Paulet, 1285 Wyncrest Court, stated he represented the neighborhood group that had <br />worked with Guidant. He stated his comments were essentially the same as he made at <br />the recent neighborhood meeting. He stated the neighborhood group was made up of <br />residents of the Wyncrest neighborhood. He indicated they had received some criticism <br />for the make up of the group, but efforts were made to include people in the surrounding <br />neighborhoods. He stated they were originally concerned about traffic issues, building <br />heights, the plan to vacate Fernwood and the notification requirements. He noted they felt <br />the neighborhood meetings were very productive and they felt there had been significant <br />compromises on Guidant's part. He outlined the major accomplishments they had made . <br />with Guidant. He stated at no time was it the goal to stop the expansion plan, but rather to <br />have some say with Guidant on the expansion. He stated the residents were also very <br />concerned that the phasing plan be watched and foJ1owed very closely and that MnDOT, <br />the County, and the City make sure that all of the infrastructures were in place. <br /> <br />Pat Krenn, 1230 WyIicrest Court, stated they really liked Guidant getting rid of the 40- <br />foot tower on the Nestle property. He stated he hoped this development did not stick up <br />above the trees too much. He stated he liked what they did with the parking lot. He stated <br />hc would like to see the time changed for evening access to Fetnwood beginning at 5:30 <br />p.m. instead of 6:00 p.m. He stated he liked the coInrtlent to do a traffic study after each <br />phase. <br /> <br />Paul Stoddard, 1313 Karth Lake Circle, agreed with the other speakers and stated <br />Guidant had been a good neighbor, and even though he was not anxious to see the <br />development take place, it was at least being done in a reasonable manller. He asked if <br />the traffic study that had been done took into account the two new proposed entrances <br />along County Road F and asked if they would have some type of traffic control at County <br />Road F and Hamline. Mr. Parrish replied that was an improvement they had been talking <br />about with the County. <br /> <br />Mr. Reimer replied the new entrances were included in the traffic study. <br /> <br />Bill Franke, 1228 Wyuridge Drive, stated this was not turning out quite as he expected. . <br />With respect to the Master Plan, he felt very comfortable to where the Master Plan had <br />gone. However, Guidant was asking the City to make decisions about things without a <br />Development Agreement. He asked why that had not been discussed with the <br />Commission. He stated he did not oppose the Master Plan, but he wanted to know that the <br />