11-29-10-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—November 29, 2010 13 7.A. Presbyterian Homes Redevelopment Proposal (continued) Mayor Harpstead asked if this would be an amendment to the previous landscaping recommendation F. City Planner Beekman recommended this be added as Condition O. MOTION: Mayor Harpstead moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a_motion to amend the proposed Condition 3.0 O to become Condition 3.0 A.13 and have _ it read: Landscape Plan prepared by LHB, Inc. with the addition of extensive screenine due to the expansion of the south parkine lot with the approval of the City Staff. Councilmember Holmes stated there was already something in the agreement about landscaping that needs to be approved by the neighborhoods. City Planner Beekman clarified that on page 5, Item B.5. references the landscaping that needs to be done in conjunction with the neighborhoods. She stated that what Councilmember Holden and Mayor Harpstead are proposing would be additional landscaping for the south side of the site. The motion to amend 3.0 A. 13 was called to a vote. The amended motion carried unanimously Councilmember Holden asked if there are any access points or easements where a City sign could be placed. City Planner Beekman stated there are no easements on this site. This is something that has been discussed with the site across the street. Councilmember Holden stated if TIF is not approved then the City would not have access to this piece of property unless the City purchased it. Mayor Harpstead stated the proper place for a gateway sign would be on the corner if this does not work out and the City couldn't impose on private property to have a City gateway sign. Councilmember Hoiden agreed that the proper place is across the street but the City could be loosing an opportunity if TIF is not approved. City Attorney Filla clarified a PUD agreement pertains to the use of the site and proving the City with access for a gateway sign has nothing to do with the development of the site. This would not seem to be a reasonable condition. The motion to approve the Development Agreement with the additions of Conditions L, M, and N and amendment of Condition A.13 was called to a vote. The motion carried unanimous) 5-0 .