07-30-07-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JULY 30, 2007 7 Councilmember Harpstead asked if it would be possible to use some of the park dedication fees to do noise reduction. City Attorney Filla stated that State Statutes limit what park dedication fees can be used for, and this would not qualify. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Councilmember Holden requested staff document somewhere Council's concerns with the nOIse Issues. Mr. Thomas Lynch, 3220 Hamline Avenue South, stated he has lived in his area for 42 years. He expressed concern about the loss of the trees on the lots and the noise generated by the highway. He questions what the 1980 Comprehensive Plan said about this property. Expresses concern for the homes that will be built on the proposed lots due to the proximity of the highway. Mayor Harpstead stated that the 1998 Comprehensive Plan is available, which supersedes the 1980 Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Holden stated the applicant is meeting all of the requirements of the Code. States that the City had no legal basis to tell the applicant he could not subdivide and legally everything was in order and they could not turn this down. B. Motion to Approve Plannine: Case 06-040 for a Final PUD of Phase 1 and 2 of the Traverse Business Center Based on a Findine: that the Submitted Plans are in Substantial Conformance with the Master PUD Subiect to the Twenty-three Conditions in the July 30, 2007 Plannine: Case Report Mr. Lehnhoff stated the applicants were requesting a Final PUD of Phase I and 2 of the Traverse Business Center based on the findings that the submitted plans are in substantial conformance with the Master PUD subject to the twenty-three conditions in the July 30, 2007 Planning Case Report. He reviewed his analysis, the proposed plan, the design standards, the landscaping requirements, and the sign plan request. Councilmember McClung notes that most of the signs on the comparable locations did not have monument signs viewable from the roadway. Councilmember Grant states that in this particular case that the building needs to be identified because the entrance is not logically next to the building. States that a monument sign on Highway 96 is necessary for getting to the building. Asks if the building will have multiple tenants with an anchor tenant? Mr. Lehnhoff states that question can be directed to the applicant. Reviews the lighting plan requirements and notes that the City can request an updated EA W or traffic study. Staff has not requested an updated study at this time because the proposed project from 2001 has not changed,