Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – JULY 22, 2019 8 <br /> <br />the site to 90 stalls, meaning the site would be overparked by 12 stalls. He commented further on <br />how parking requirements for senior uses could be further discussed by the Council in the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes asked if a .5 parking requirement would leave enough space for <br />employee parking. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden questioned if the City had a say in the restrictive covenant. <br /> <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported this was outside the City’s <br />realm. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes asked if restrictive covenants were allowed in the City. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik stated he was not aware of any prohibition. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant requested further comment from the property owner regarding the restrictive <br />covenant. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked if the park would have activities for small children, along with <br />seniors. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant commented he attended a recent PTRC meeting and noted this park was being <br />viewed as a senior park. He reported the five or six stations could be completed by seniors and the <br />PTRC approved of this concept. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden questioned if the stormwater pond could be given to Summit. <br /> <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla commented the property line could <br />be redrawn to ensure the stormwater pond was owned by Summit. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik advised the stormwater pond could be privately owned with an easement. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant stated it was his understanding the PTRC had to weigh in and approve a land swap. <br />He explained if the lot lines were changed, the PTRC would have to review this item for approval. <br /> <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported this was the case. He <br />explained it was the City’s intent to have an agreement in place stating the applicant would be <br />responsible for maintaining this pond in perpetuity. He indicated this would be covered within the <br />developer’s agreement. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes stated it was not good practice to have stormwater ponds located on <br />City property. She recommended the drainage pond be located on Summit property. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung asked for a break down on what percentage of the stormwater pond <br />was needed for impervious surface on the park versus the private building. <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla explained he would have to review <br />this further and report back to the Council.