05-14-12-R Draft Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—MAY 14, 2012 13 City Planner Beekman explained she had met with the applicant on May 2"d. She continues to have concerns with the comprehensive land use plan for this development. Mayor Grant questioned how parking requirements were set for residential uses. City Planner Beekman noted this was on a per unit basis and not based on the square footage of the building. MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion to deny Planning Case 1.2-009 for the Preliminary and Final Plat, and Master and Final PUD at 1201 County Road E based on the submitted plans and following findings of fact: 1. The application lacks a comprehensive master land use plan. 2. The application lacks a detailed phasing and construction plan with timing for phasing implementation. 3. The traffic and parking cannot be fully analyzed because a comprehensive land use plan has not been submitted. 4. Lot 2 is a non conforming lot, which does not have approved access to County Road E or Lexington Avenue based on the submitted concept plan. 5. The application lacks a detailed lighting plan. 6. The application lacks a detailed security plan. 7. The application has too many variables that remain undefined. Councilmember Holden requested the City Attorney repeat his comments on how applications are to proceed through the City for approval. City Attorney Filla commented the process works best if the applicant submits a completed application up front which allows for a thorough review and recommendation from the Planning Commission. This would allow for the Council to make a more informed decision. Councilmember Holmes asked if the denial was based solely on the Planning Commission's findings of fact or if additional findings could be added. Mayor Grant noted that additional findings could be added. Councilmember Holmes suggested another finding be added to note the applicant had not submitted a full application. New material was submitted by the applicant for review by the Council this evening that was not reviewed by the Planning Commission in April. MOTION AMENDMENT: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded an amendment to add an additional findings of fact: