CC 11-27-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—NOVEMBER 27, 2006 3 • Commission reviewed the case and recommended approval of the Planned Unit Development (8tt') Amendment and Site Plan Review based on the submitted plans and a finding that the proposal will not have negative impact on the neighborhood or City when the twelve conditions are met as outlined in staff's November 20, 2006 report. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Pellegrin seconded a motion to approve Planning Case 06-033: PUD Amendment & Site Plan for Boston Scientific at 4100 Hamline Avenue North Subject to 12 Conditions as noted in staffs November 20, 2006 report. The motion carried unanimously(4-0). B. Motion to Approve Planning Case 06-028: Site Plan Review for Hien Ngo & Nguvet Ky at 3433 Lake Johanna Blvd. Subject to 11 Conditions Mr. Lehnhoff stated the applicants were requesting approval of the Site Plan Review at 3433 Lake Johanna Boulevard, subject to the eleven conditions as noted in staffs November 20, 2006 report. He indicated the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Site Plan Review for re-landscaping based on the submitted plans and a finding that the re- landscaping plan will work to resolve the clear-cutting violation and will work to address screening, erosion, and stormwater concerns. Councilmember Larson stated he believed it was unfortunate this happened, but at the same • time he believed the owner should be commended for putting landscaping on the property. He noted what still concerned him was they were adding vegetation, but they still had a home going out on the lake that had a nice view to the lake because the old vegetation had been cleared out and the vegetation that was being replaced was low vegetation. He stated he would like to see change in the placement of the trees so they had a true restoration of the property to what was there originally. Councilmember Holden arrived at 7:17 p.m. Councilmember Grant noted it was a tragedy this was clear-cut through a misunderstanding and by the clear-cutting it certainly enhanced the property and improved the view to the lake. He stated the fact was the property was clear-cut and it needed to be re-landscaped. He stated the Planning Commission had approved this and he agreed with that approval. He indicated he believed it would be somewhat punitive to require the property owner to place large trees in the middle of his property at this point. He asked the applicant if he intended to live in this home. Hien Ngo, applicant, stated he planned to live in the home and sell his other home in North Oaks. Mr. Ngo stated they were proposing four very large trees on the hills in front of the house in the landscaping plan. He agreed they should probably move some of the trees closer to the home. Mr. Grant stated he did not see any need to move the trees up the hill because of the natural • grade of the lot which would screen the home better,but also block the view of the lake.