My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-06-10-PC
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2010-2019
>
PC Packets 2010
>
10-06-10-PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/9/2015 2:24:27 PM
Creation date
10/1/2010 3:37:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Description
Planning Commission Agenda
Document
Planning Commission Agenda
General (2) - Date
10/6/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
97
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Only two PHS facilities had 3- or 4 -story buildings closer to a SFH than us and those two <br />facilities had SFHs on only one or two sides. The other sides had large scale commercial <br />buildings <br />We also conducted a second analysis of aerial photographs. Results can be found in <br />Appendix A, Table 2. For this analysis we examined what was to the north, east, south, and west <br />side of any PHS 3- or 4 -story building and classified what we saw first as either (a) single family <br />homes, (b) larger commercial, governmental, industrial buildings, large -scale residential, or (c) <br />greenspace. We then examined each of the 36 facilities that we could assess on all four sides. We <br />found: <br />1. 70% of PHS facilities in Minnesota have SFHs only on 0 or 1 side of 3- and 4 -story <br />buildings. <br />2. 74% of PHS facilities in Minnesota have same -scale commercial, nonresidential, or <br />industrial buildings on at least two sides. <br />3. 94% of PHS facilities in Minnesota have same -scale commercial, nonresidential, <br />industrial buildings on one or more sides. <br />In other words, the PHS buildings fit with the other commercial, nonresidential, or <br />industrial buildings in their locations. They don't dominate the skyline in every direction. They <br />are not out of scale with their surroundings. The single family homes in the area perhaps are <br />accustomed to having commercial operations nearby. <br />One illustrative comparison <br />At the Planning Commission's September 8 2010 work session, it was suggested that <br />the PHS Stonecrest facility in Woodbury would be a worthwhile comparison to the proposed <br />Arden Hills facility. At least one commissioner asked for pictures of Stonecrest. Figure 5 shows <br />the Stonecrest locality. <br />Whatever else can be said for Stonecrest, it cannot be said that it sits amidst SFHs on four <br />sides. Rather it sits in the middle of an extensive area from Valley Creek Rd on the north to <br />Pioneer Drive on the south, from Radio Dr on the west side to Interlachen Parkway on the east <br />side. Within that area, there is not one single family home. There is a library, YMCA, <br />Kowalski's, and an Allina Clinic. There are two very large apartment or townhouse complexes <br />which may be owned by PHS. Across Interlachen from Stonecrest, there is a cluster of SFHs that <br />front on another street. <br />To complete the comparison, Figure 6 shows PHS of Arden Hills, and clearly reveals the <br />residential character of the area independent single family homes in every direction from the <br />PHS property. The only other commercial properties (the Cox building, the empty gas station, the <br />triangle building) are residential -sized buildings. <br />Shorewood Drive. Page 5 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.