05-14-12-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—MAY 14, 2012 7 the application based on the findings of fact and submitted plans. She noted the applicant was present this evening. Councilmember Holden questioned if the site plan had additional information on McGuire's and the banquet halls. City Planner Beekman explained she did not have the layout of the building for McGuire's or the banquet halls. Councilmember Holden inquired if the applicant had submitted a lighting plan. City Planner Beekman stated the applicant had not submitted a lighting plan to date but would submit one at a later time. Councilmember Werner indicated new information had come forward since April 18, 2012 and questioned if the Planning Commission's decision would change based on this new information. City Planner Beekman indicated this would be impossible to determine. Mayor Grant requested further comment from Staff on the new material and information provided by the applicant since the Planning Commission meeting. City Planner Beekman stated a revised site plan was submitted, along with a concept drainage and utility plan and Attachment A. She commented Attachment F was also new material that was not reviewed by the Planning Commission. Councilmember Tamble discussed the concerns brought up by the Commission in April and stated the applicant had submitted material regarding the lighting plan, floor plan, security of the building and a traffic study. He questioned if the information submitted satisfied the concerns expressed by the Commission on April 18tn City Planner Beekman indicated information regarding the lighting plan has yet to be submitted and an email was received regarding the security plan and was included in Attachment F. The revised floor plans have been submitted as Attachment A. Councilmember Holden questioned why the site plan did not include traffic flows as was completed for Arden Plaza. She inquired why a master plan was not completed for this site. City Planner Beekman stated a list of application requirements was provided to the applicant. Staff met with the applicant in December and she has been working with him since that time. The application went before the Planning Commission in April based on the information received. Mayor Grant stated the PUD was incomplete when the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal. He explained the master PUD was still incomplete and was uncertain if the Council could proceed in making a determination on this application.