CC 10-09-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, October 9, 1990 Page 3 ORD. #273; PROP'D Council was referred to a memorandum from Planner Bergly IDRA'roRIUM, elated 9-5-90, a draft of the ordinance as prepared by the . LEXINGI'ON AVENUE City Attorney elated 8-23-90 and the Planning Cormnission SI'UDY AREA minutes of 10-3-90, relative to the proposed nmatorium for the Lexington Avenue study Area. Bergly reported the plan has been f=rded to the Metropolitan Council for their review and recornrnendation. He explaine::J. initial response from the Met Council is a request f= a traffic study; based on a miscalculation of the acreage involved. Council questioned when the Met Council review will be completed. Bergly stated the review will probably be aCCOllg;>lished in two or three months. '!he Planner explaine::J. that an application was heard by Planning Cormnission relating to development of a site in the study area; the City has the option to waive the ordinance if the development is consistent with the new guidelines developed for the proposed rezoning of this area. Malone moved, seconded by Mahowald, to adopt Ordinance No. 273, AN ORDINANCE ADDING SEX:TION XIV 'ill APPENDIX A OF '!HE ZONING ORDINANCE OF '!HE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RErATrnG 'ill '!HE IMPOSITION OF AN JNI'ERIM DE'VEWFMENr IDRA'roRIUM. Motion carried unaniJrously. . (5-0) ,~E #90-11; SUP Council was referred to Planner Bergly's report and the aruRO:l, HWY 96 & Planning Commission minutes dated 10-3-90, relative to SNELLING AVE; srs. the application for a Special Use Permit/site Plan Review .' VOIDDYMYR & OIGA f= a House of Worship at Highway 96 and Snelling Avenue. Planner Bergly discussed the revisions in the previously suJ::xnitted site plan as ,'" - relate to parking setbacks, landscaped area and removal of three residences previously proposed on the site. He noted the Planning Cormnission recommen:led approval of the SUP and site Plan, based on the findings listed in the minutes as Items A thru E, and noting corrlitions of approval as Items F thru 1. Council1nen1ber Mahowald questioned if the parking is reduced on the revised plan. Architect Frank Niemuth explained the parking area was rec:onfigured and the nurober of parking spaces reduced to ao.;u,......Jdte the 100 ft. setback frem residential property, as required. Planner Bergly explaine::J. the applicant has not shown a need for requiring additional parking and the number of parking spaces provided meets the rn:ini1num requirements of the zoning code. Council questioned" if the applicant attempted to negotiate purchase of the property to the west of this site and if the land is obtaine::J. will the site plan be revised. '!he architect stated the applicant is still negotiating with the property owner to purchase the westerly parcel; if the land is obtained the plan will be rec:onfigured. . . Council1nen1ber Mahowald questioned if Park Dedication is required on tax exenpt property and if a stipulation should be attached to suJ::sequent approval of the application. '!he Planner advised that park dedication was required for the North Heights Illtheran Church site and should be attached as a condition of approval.