My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 07-18-2005
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
CC 07-18-2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:11:14 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 12:08:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />JULY 18,2005 <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson noted this was a destination development and he did not believe <br />whether anyone would be going to this development because they saw a sign on Highway 96 and <br />that was his intent on voting yes on the amendment and he believed the monument sign on <br />Highway 96 was sufficient. Mr. Filla stated he believed the Motion was to have a not to exceed a <br />2 x 2 foot sign. He stated another way to say this was that each unit should have four square feet <br />in signage including a one-foot address and nameplate plaque adjacent to the entry for the unit. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson indicated that was his intent and he would make another motion to <br />make this clear. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a <br />motion to limit the signage to four square foot signs adjacent to the <br />entrances of each unit, including a one-foot square foot address nameplate, <br />and there be no other signs applied to the exterior of the buildings. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem asked if he was still approving the illumination of the signage with <br />lighting, or was he also striking that. Mayor Aplikowski stated she believed there should be a <br />light above the sign. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson replied he was comfortable leaving the lighting above the signage. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski requested this come back to Council for final review. <br /> <br />The motion carried unanimously (4-1 Mayor Aplikowski opposed). <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated item C on Page 2 of the PUD permit was in need of adjustment. <br />He asked if they needed to change the number of units to 29 now that they were dropping a unit. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a <br />motion to amend item 2.0.c read: 29 Office condominiums versus 30. <br />Note: Motion Ilot voted Oil. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark pointed out there were many other changes that would need to be made also in the <br />PUD permit. <br /> <br />Mr. Filla suggested Council say the conditions attached to the permit should be amended to <br />reflect the conditions of approval. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Mayor Aplikowski seconded a motion <br />to approve Resolution #05-45, approving a Planned Unit Development, <br />PUD Permit, and Preliminary Plat for Royal Oaks Realty with the <br />conditions as amended. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated based on the motion there would be only one exit and entrance, <br />which meant there would be "U" turns necessary. He asked Mr. Soler if this was acceptable. Mr. <br /> <br />11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.