07-11-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION -- JUNE 1, 2005 12 . Homeowners: Conceals partial view of development and Highway 96; tempers the sounds from parking lot and Highway 96; provides consistent landscaping with existing townhouse berms; reduces some loss of property values; prevents nuisance headlight glare from parking lot and south drive. She noted "good berms make good neighbors". Mike Giel, 4534 Keithson Drive, stated he had lived in his home for 15 years and he was not opposed to an acceptable development of this area, but expressed concern for the safety with respect to traffic for the residents on Keithson Drive and the townhomes. He expressed concern about having two "U" turns in this area. He noted this was not only dangerous, but it was a major imposition for the people coming out of Keithson Drive. He indicated he did not accept the traffic report because that engineer did not "live with this traffic experience". He stated this was a major safety concern and he did not understand why the County would accept a "u" turn on Hamline and then another "U" turn up the road. He noted Mounds View High School used this area as a major thoroughfare to getting to school. He stated he wanted a cut-through in the island so a "U" turn was not necessary. He also suggested they turn the buildings 26-30 to face the parking lot and eliminate the road onto Hmnline. He stated it was the people who made Arden Hills and it was the people who had to stay in the City, not the businesses. . John Lawyer, 4539 Keithson Drive, stated he had lived in his home since 1977. He indicated he did not oppose the development, but would like to see it better insulated from the neighborhood so it did not disturb the quality of neighborhood life. He expressed concern about the pedestrian trail to the west ofthe property and that it not take the appearance of an alley way. He indicated they used the trail at least twice a day. He expressed concern about the fenced in trash dumpster and the brick wall of the westernmost units of the development, which was 10 feet from the edge of the foot trail. He suggested a berm along the western side. He requested the trash dumpster be located somewhere other than the western edge of the property. He expressed concern about the possibility of retail space in this development. He suggested they consider eliminating the possibility of retail space in this development. Cindy Owen, 4490 Hamline Avenue North, stated she lived one block south of Highway 96 and had lived in her home for seven years. She stated she had a teenage son who was going to Mounds View High School next year. She expressed concern about the traffic on the road and the noise that was generated by the traffic. She expressed concern about the safety of the kids that were waiting at the bus stops. She also expressed concern about the speed the County Sheriff uses on Hamline Avenue. . James Pinckney, 1425 Arden View Drive, stated there appeared to be four areas of non- compliance in this development, and he did not see any variances from the developer. He asked for justification from the developer as to these non-compliances. He asked if the developer had looked at all of the possibilities for landscaping. He expressed concern about the traffic study and the potential future and existing traffic problems. He stated traffic from the TCAAP project was just starting to build and he believed Guidant was less than half way into their expansion and hiring for a significant expansion of their facility. He believed the traffic study was flawed and it appeared to him that there were big issues related to this. He asked if a modification to Highway 96 was a possibility to allow better access. He acknowledged there will be an increase in traffic in the City in the next five years, but he was concerned they were not addressing two major projects that added to the traffic right now (TCAAP and Guidant).