CC 01-08-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 8, 2001 9 . Counci1member Rem asked if they wanted the compactor to be screened in on an individual basis, or did they want the building management to come in with a proposal. Councilmember Larson replied he did not think they should be fencing this in individually, even though that is what has been done in the past. He stated each time they dealt with this issue, they had asked the building management to deal with the problem. Councilmember Rem asked when the project was done, did they want screening on an individual basis. Mayor Probst responded no. The building management should be responsible for this and the original idea was that all of this was going to occur inside the building, but as requests had been made, each one was getting addressed individually. He stated part of it was good news that the businesses are being successful and growing, but the bad news was that the plan the building management originally presented was not being followed. He stated Councilmember Larson was correct in that if they understood this going in, they would have required a more aggressive screening approach, not individual screening. Councilmember Rem asked ifturning down a tenant's request was the most effective way to deal with this problem, or should the building management company be contacted directly. She stated this issue should not be given to the building management indirectly through the tenants. Mayor Probst replied the building management seemed to be more responsive when the tenants were trying to get something. . Ms. Compton stated they were the only tenants in the facility and they had a ten-year lease with seven (7) years remaining on the lease. She indicated the compactor they currently had is on "its last leg", and if they were not allowed to get the new compactor, they would have a pile up of garbage in the parking lot, which would lead to a lot of problems. She stated the current compactor did not run properly in the cold weather. Councilmember Aplikowski stated she was in favor of this application. She indicated there were two issues - one being enlarging of the compactor and the other being the screening issue. She asked if there was some way that they could approve the compactor issue, and then get the management company in to deal with the screening issues. She stated she did not have a problem with the enlargement of the compactor. Mayor Probst replied if they were going to approve this tonight, they should approve it with the screening in case the building management did not deal with this issue. He stated there was still some time before the screening was required to be put up, and in that period of time they may be able to get the management company to address these issues. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve Planning Case #00-40, Manufacturer's Services, 4300 Round Lake Road, Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment, with the Planning Commissions' recommendations being taken into consideration. The motion carried (4-1, Larson). .