CCP 05-28-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I' DP Afl . ~"'. I ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MAY 13. 1996 7 I- Councilmember Hicks stated he has no issue with approving the final RLS as well. He inquired I if the RLS has any time limit before filing. Mr. Ringwald stated that once the RLS is approved, the applicant has 60 days to record the final RLS or the approval is void. I Councilmember Hicks inquired what concerns Mr. Filla has with the covenant option. Mr. Fritsinger stated Mr. Filla felt the covenant option would be simple, but may be difficult to track if the land stayed within the family. I Mayor Probst inquired if the deed would change upon purchase. Ms. Buetow verified it would. I Mayor Probst suggested placing restrictions on both lots. Mr. Ringwald stated that language could be linked to both lots. I Mayor Probst inquired if the RLS could be approved conditioned upon the City Attorney's approval. Mr. Fritsinger stated that could be done. I Councilmember Aplikowski inquired if the lot sizes were equal. Mr. Ringwald stated that Lot A was the largest, B the smallest, and C in between. Councilmember Aplikowski inquired if the lot Ie sizes could be changed. Mr. Ringwald stated they could not, as they would not meet lot width requirements. I Mayor Probst stated the RLS could be approved subject to the City Attorney approval, as it is not the City Council's function to decide on the mechanism. I Councilmember Hicks inquired what the cost of the RLS was, and if another RLS could be done, keeping Tract A and B together. Ms. Buetow stated the RLS was approximately $2,000. She stated she felt it unlikely the family would sell Tract B, but wanted to keep the economic option I available. Councilmember Keirn inquired ifthe family could do nothing and sell Lot 18. Mr. Fritsinger I stated that future councils would be faced with the issue, and was concerned about future regulations. I MOTION: Hicks moved and Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve Planning Case #95- 23, Bart Buetow, Minor Subdivision, 1433 Forest Lane, subject to the conditions I outlined in the Staffrecommendations, with Conditions 8 and 9 revised once protected by either a covenant or other mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). I Councilmember Hicks clarified that the park dedication proposed by Ms. Walsh would still be ~ appropriate if the current RLS is filed, outlining the three lots. I !