CC 04-29-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 29, 2002 5 • Mayor Probst stated it seemed inappropriate to proceed with a plat that vacated a street until the traffic analysis was completed and they knew what the implications were going to be. He stated they needed to proceed carefully that they did not approve more than they should. He asked if the skyway was part of this request. If it was, and they were not in a position to vacate the road, it would need to be built with the proper clearances. Mr. Parrish replied the intent was to proceed in a manner that was independent of other actions. He stated they would just plat the building. He indicated this could proceed as a stand-alone, independent project. With respect to the skyway, he stated what they attempted to do was if it was vacated, this would be a non-issue, but if it was not vacated, there would need to be an easement issued. Mayor Probst stated the two issues subject to review were the setback and the height, which was open to some interpretation. Mr. Parrish replied with respect to the height issue, it was consistent with the building. Council Member Grant stated this was clearly part of the larger plan for Guidant and he indicated he was supportive of the overall project, as well as this proposal. Council Member Larson asked why staff did not put in the conditions that were attached to the recommendation regarding the building materials being brick masonry. Mr. Parrish replied that • was what had been submitted and it would be in keeping with the site plan and therefore, it was not necessary to put this as a recommendation. He stated it was required that the development be in conformance with the site plan that had been submitted. Jud Brasch and John Larson, RSB Architect, stated they had submitted some elevations for the building, and it was their intent to select materials that would be compatible to the existing buildings on the campus. Council Member Grant asked if they were okay with the eight conditions. Mr. Larson and Mr. Brasch replied they agreed to the conditions. Bill Frank, 1228 Wynridge Drive, stated in general he agreed with this development, but he was concerned that there was no evidence to support the level of development proposed was justified. He stated he was not opposed to this specific development, but he was opposed to the process thus far. Jim Paulet ,1285 Wyncrest Court, stated he believed Guidant has been a good neighbor and they were providing jobs to the community, but the neighbors had concerns regarding some aspects of the development plan. He stated they were concerned about the size of the buildings and the ramps, as well as the scope of the project. He expressed concern about the traffic issues. He stated they also had drainage concerns. He stated he believed they should slow down some and the neighbors should be involved with some of the planning. He stated it seemed that all the • residents doing were reacting to the planning and he requested the residents be included in this