My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-26-21-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2021
>
04-26-21-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2021 8:49:15 AM
Creation date
5/12/2021 8:48:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – APRIL 26, 2021 20 <br /> <br /> <br />7. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer <br />infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all <br />stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. <br />8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a landscape financial security equal to 125% of <br />the cost of the landscaping to be installed on the site shall be submitted. The Applicant <br />must submit a detailed cost estimate for the landscaping so staff can determine the final <br />amount. Landscape financial security shall be held for two full growing seasons. <br />9. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a landscaping letter of credit or escrow shall be <br />required. <br />10. The Applicant shall be required to provide photometric calculations for the lighting at the <br />property lines of all adjacent residential properties indicating the plan meets ordinance <br />requirements. <br /> <br />Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the options available to the City Council on this matter: <br /> <br />1. Recommend Approval with Conditions <br />2. Recommend Approval as Submitted <br />3. Recommend Denial <br />4. Table <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes reported this Planning Case was a little confusing because it wasn’t <br />clear what the Council was approving. She believed the applicant should make it clear what was <br />being approved with this case. <br /> <br />Jay Pomeroy, Landscape Architect with Anderson Johnson Associates, thanked the Council for <br />its consideration. He reported the proposal before the Council was for a nine lane running track, a <br />synthetic football field within the track, a practice field adjacent to the track and the four light <br />poles, flag poles, scoreboard, plazas, and fencing. He stated the items that were not included was <br />any work on the bleachers or the press box. He explained the plans submitted by Bethel <br />University were rather lengthy and addressed the details of the project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes reported the Council does not know anything about the scoreboard. She <br />supported this item being tabled because the Council did not have enough information regarding <br />this request. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden commented she thought Planning Consultant Kansier had stated the <br />plaza was not included in the plans that were being approved. She indicated she was confused as <br />well. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant questioned how the Planning Commission approved this request without <br />understanding the request. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes stated she watched the Planning Commission meeting and wrote down <br />her questions and noted the Planning Commission did not address the items that were being <br />approved. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden indicated she was the Council Liaison at the recent Planning <br />Commission meeting and the items that were presented to the Commission were the track, the turf
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.