Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – FEBRUARY 8, 2021 6 <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik advised this would be acceptable noting the City would have the right to <br />enforce the Site Plan and the PUD Agreement if the developer was in default. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant questioned how the Council wanted to address the trees. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung supported the City protecting the trail through the land dedication of <br />the trail. He recommended that the trail issue not be mixed in with the tree issue. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden supported Condition 34 as recommended by staff. <br /> <br />Councilmember Scott commented he did not believe a separate condition was necessary. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes explained she would like to see a condition included in the PUD. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden questioned how staff would like Condition 34 to be phrased, ensuring <br />that all future trail maintenance would be the responsibility of the property owner. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik recommended a motion be placed on the floor and then he would provide <br />the Council with language for Condition 34. He requested the Council discuss the parking <br />agreement and if this would be acceptable or not. He noted the tree mitigation also had to be <br />addressed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden indicated she supported tree mitigation in the amount of $50,986.60. <br />She believed the “public good” for the PUD was that the trail land was being dedicated to the <br />City, which would cover the expense for the park dedication fees that should be paid to the City. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes agreed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Scott commented the developer understood the tree mitigation payment would <br />be in this range. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung supported the developer paying $50,986.60 as a minimum. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant stated he supported this number as well. <br /> <br />Chris Buday, representative for the applicant, reported the $50,000 would be restraints on the <br />project. He understood the Council was headed towards this payment amount. He questioned if <br />the land dedication could be done without being a condition for approval. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated she did not understand what the applicant was proposing. <br /> <br />Mr. Novaczyk commented by dedicating the land to the City, the long-term maintenance of the <br />trail would not be the responsibility of the developer. He explained this would help in offsetting <br />the cost of the tree mitigation. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant questioned if the land dedication could be addressed this evening or would this <br />item have to be sent back to the City Attorney for consideration.