Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> -- <br /> DRAFT <br /> Arden Hills Council 6 January 31, 1994 . <br /> indefinitely; unless the use has ceased or been <br /> discontinued for a period of ninety consecutive days. <br /> Councilmember Hicks stated this is a difficult decision, <br /> however, he would not support the motion. Hicks further <br /> stated he would support the termination agreement, <br /> Mayor Sather noted that legal counsel states the minimum <br /> amortization schedule is 5 years, and there are <br /> conditions that could be incorporated into the <br /> amortization agreement including the City having to pay <br /> back the property holder for improvements made to the <br /> property. The agreement could also include potential <br /> costs for lost revenue, and other costs yet undiscovered, <br /> and unclarified or it could include nothing depending on <br /> the agreement. <br /> Discussion followed relating to the positive and negative <br /> effects of a termination (amortization) agreement. <br /> Councilmember Hicks stated that in terms of advantages <br /> versus disadvantages, he feels the long range best <br /> interest for the City is to remove the current use of <br /> this property. Hicks further stated that this business <br /> is not compatible with the R-1 district, however, one . <br /> could argue that the bus terminal was established at this <br /> location prior to some of the residential development <br /> that is currently located in this area. Hicks further <br /> stated that the area has expanded and developed, and <br /> there is this conflict with odors and traffic which is a <br /> real negative, Hicks agrees that the negative from the <br /> City's point of view would be if the termination contract <br /> . would become an expense to the City. If this would <br /> happen, Hicks would want a sufficient length of time to <br /> allow the owners to find another location, such that it <br /> would not cost them or the City unduly. <br /> Councilmember Malone stated if the City would amend the <br /> zoning ordinance to allow a Special Use Permit, the City <br /> could regulate the site and allow for this use to <br /> continue. The City could buy the site, however, the City <br /> does not have the funds available to buy the site. <br /> Malone further commented the problem with amortization is <br /> how does the Council set a time limit to coincide with <br /> the cost factor. <br /> Councilmember Malone noted that a termination agreement <br /> would act no differently than a Special Use Permit in <br /> regards to conditions that have to be placed and agreed <br /> upon, The paving of the lot, fuel tanks, clean up and . <br /> other needed improvements could all be conditions in the <br /> termination agreement, however! the City would have to <br />