Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~ <br />~~J-IILLS <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />August 16,2006 <br /> <br />CC Agenda Item 7.B <br /> <br />TO: Mayor & City Council <br /> <br />FROM: James Lehnhoff, City PlannerY <br /> <br />SUBJECT; PC #06-023; <br />Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. <br />1440-1450 W. Highway 96 <br />Master and Final Plan PUD and Preliminary Plat for the <br />Old City Hall IPublie Works site <br />"Arden Hills Office Park" <br /> <br />Baekl!round <br /> <br />The applicant, Royal Oaks Realty, proposes to construct 62,432 square feet of office space on the <br />former 6.83 acre City Hall and Public Works garage property. The total footprint of the of1ice <br />would be 41,024 square feet. The ol1ice space is proposed to be divided into 23 for-sale condos <br />in seven separate buildings, though individual condos may be combined to form a single unit. <br />The property is proposed to utilize the existing driveway approach from Ramsey County <br />Highway 96 and to construct a new driveway across an existing access casement to Hamline <br />Avenue. The applicant proposes to share the access road offofHamline with the daycare that is <br />located at the intersection of Highway 96 and Hamlinc Avenue. <br /> <br />The revised application for less office space, fewer parking spaces, and more landscaped area <br />was submitted in July 2006. The attached Planning Case report reviews the proposal in detail <br />(Attachment 7B-3). Additional information from the Plamling Commission is provided in the <br />"Discussion" area below this section. Documents submitted at or after the Planning Commission <br />meeting are included in Attachment 7B-l. <br /> <br />Tn June and July of 2005, the City reviewed a proposal from Royal Oaks Realty for a 76,000 <br />square foot office condominium development that would be divided into 30 office condos in <br />seven separate buildings. In that proposal, the property was proposed to utilize the existing <br />driveway approach from Highway 96 and construct an access across an existing access easement <br />to I-lamline Avenue. At the July 2005 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission voted 6-1 <br />10 recommend approval of the proposal subject to a number of conditions related to landscaping, <br />drainage, access, and layout.. The City Council reviewed the application in July 2005. A motion <br />was made to approve thc PUD, which resulted in a vote of 3-2. Since a PUD approval requires a <br />4/5'5 majority, the PUD was not approved. <br />\\Mclro-inet.w;iardcnhillsIPlanning1Planning Cases'.2006W6-023 Royal Oaks PUD & Preliminary Pft1/ (PENDll\/G)I08()906 - CC Report Royal <br />Oaks PUD & Preliminary Plat.doc <br /> <br />Page 1 of6 <br />