Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />. Arden Hills Council 7 August 17, 1992 <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone opened discussion regarding the height <br />issue, He commented that it should be understood that this <br />is a unique circumstance in that this building provides a <br />monument type building for the entrance to the college and <br />it does not obstruct views of other properties. <br /> <br /> <br />Dave Lissner, representing the college, emphasized that in <br />considering the SUP amendment, it should be noted that the <br />concept of the proposed building has not changed from the <br />original Master Plan. He added that it is understood that <br />the height variance would only apply to this particular set <br />of plans, Planner Bergly agreed that if a height variance <br />were granted, it would be attached to this particular set of <br />plans, and any substantial revisions to the plans would <br />require Council reconsideration, <br /> <br />~orris Strawbridge, architect for the college, clarified the <br />heights of specific points along the roofline of the <br />\~ proposed building, the maximum point being 75' height, <br /> <br />A{ MOTION: Hicks moved, seconded by Malone, relative to Case 92- <br />"., 15, Community Life Center at Bethel College, to: <br />1) Waive the Development Moratorium, and <br />2) Approve amendment to SUP relative to the location <br />of the building, on the conditions that: <br />A) Upon approval, building and roadway changes <br />are made to the Master Plan for filing with <br />the SUP, <br />B) Other City-approved improvements not <br />incorporated on the Plan, be added to the <br />Plan, <br />C) The new Plan contain City approval date, and <br />D) Rice Creek Watershed District approves a <br />Maintenance Agreement relative to drainage; <br />and <br />3) Approve the granting of a height variance of 40' <br />(allowing a maximum building height of 75'). This <br />variance is applicable only to this structure and <br />granted in support of the unique design of the <br />structure on the basis that all height variance <br />criteria has been satisfied. <br />Motion carried unanimously (4-0). <br /> <br />ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone commented that he has some specific <br />. questions relative to this agenda item and would suggest <br />tabling. planner Bergly stated that at this time, all that <br />is being requested is to begin the process of review of the <br />proposed amendment; indicated that Council may wish to hold <br />a joint session with Planning Commission to discuss ~, <br />r <br />f <br />~ <br />r <br />