pf09-003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment A :�rt ingress/egress points and entrances along Lexington, with the proposed access for this application 55 moving north slightly, as approved by Ramsey County; and potential for limiting left turns out of that 5o driveway onto Lexington, and advantages and disadvantages of doing so. 5� Mr. Lloyd advised that staff had fielded only one (1) phone call related to the project, and that staff had .5�3 addressed the misinformation they'd been given indicating that the Ciry was intending to take property for 53 the project by Eminent Domain. Mr. Lloyd noted the one (1) written comment, attached to the record, from �o Dr. Wilson, referenced later in the meeting. 6 Mr. Lloyd noted that staff and the applicant were continuing to discuss fence height and addressed 62 parking requirements for this size of building at forty-one (41) spaces, with the applicant showing forty- 63 nine (49) spaces. 6: Applicant Representative, Sonja Simonsen, Director of Finance for Wellington Management �: Ms. Simonsen provided a brief history of the intended project over the last year, and conversations with �� neighboring property owners and staff. Ms. Simonsen advised that Wellington Management had ninety s� (90) buildings in the metropolitan area, with five (5) located in Roseville, and reviewed Wellington's s� business model focus since their establishment in 1984, and their real estate ownership and community 69 involvement over that twenty-five (25) year history in over 199 communities. 7u Ms. Simonsen provided an architectural rendering of the building and site; comments received from 7� residents at the neighborhood meeting; rationale for the north end entrance based on the initial tenant for �2 privacy issues; and only three (3) suites to be located in the entire building. �3 Discussion among Commissioners and Ms. Simonsen included rationale for location of the building closer 7s to the corner; urban features of the building; research from police departments in positioning buildings 7� and decreased traffic accidents, indicating traffic calming effects; addressed the traffic visibility triangle �s and consistencies, based on traffic engineer data, in stopping distances and times; and other site plan �� and tra�c flow issues that were discussed at the neighborhood meeting. 7� Ms. Simonsen noted that sixty-three (63) property owners had been invited to the neighborhood meeting, �g and that those attending seemed most concerned with security and lighting, which had prompted the Bo applicant to increase lighting to facilitate those concerns, since there were not street lights at that location. �3 � Ms. Simonsen reviewed conversations with Dennis Hagel of Ramsey County related to the County Road �?:' B access and their preference for closure of that access point; different use with this application, rather �s than the previous drive-thru use at the TCF Bank; landscaping and islands on site to control the site; and t�a operations of the dental office from 8:00 a.m. — 3:00 p.m., and anticipated reduced traffic. �5 Chair Bakeman noted the configuration and length of Sandhurst and existing traffic problems from �6 Lexington on to Sandhurst. �37 Commissioner Wozniak addressed whether the applicant could give some consideration the fact that the 88 existing signal light was located in the middle of the sidewalk on the north side of County Road B and �39 work with the City to widen that sidewalk along that area to allow better access for bicycles and/or 90 pedestrians. y� Commissioner Gottfried, speaking in support of bringing buildings closer to streets, expressed concern 92 that sometimes they were located too close, allowing no room for pedestrian and/or bicycle amenities, 93 and suggested the Commission consider a condition stipulating that allowance. �4 Chair Bakeman addressed her concerns with building height, questioning the height of the Cheetah 95 building at its peak, in addition to the height of the smaller residences, and how the applicant could 9s provide extra footage to make the building look less like a box and be more fitting with neighborhood's 9� character. 9� Ms. Simonsen noted that this was part of the design rationale in accentuating the entrance to avoid a �3 boxier look. Ms. Simonsen opined that the landscape plan, on paper, appeared overwhelming, but would �oo show the applicanYs efforts to make the building part of the neighborhood, and expressed willingness to �o� work with staff on facilitating pedestrian circulation around the signal post in the middle of the sidewalk. � 02 Ms. Simonsen noted that it was not the intent of the design to overshadow anyone, and that exterior � C3 materials of cultured stone were added to soften the building's exterior. �oa Discussion included whether the parking spaces were all required, or if they could be reduced to provide �05 a softer transition to the neighborhood line, with the applicant noting that, from a leasing perspective, the • • Page 2 of 6 �