Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - FEBRUARY 14, 2000 <br /> <br />D <br /> <br />.r;.; u: ~1r <br />t~-~I: ~ <br /> <br />16 <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />residential property with children. He did not agree with the reasoning that just because other <br />City parks use temporary restrooms, this park should do the same, <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Jeff Hohenshell, 1632 Chatham Avenue, stated that since the proposed complex wilt have <br />space for 250 spectators, he too was concerned about the temporary restroom facilities. He noted <br />that the Planning Commission had recommended permanent restroom facilities and he urged the <br />City Council to consider this recommendation for aesthetic, health, and safety reasons. <br /> <br />Mr MidlH"] Cooret, 1636 Chatham Avenue, stated that he visited the Bethel College site last <br />weekend with Councilmember Grant. He noted that he wilt have a direct view across the <br />prGpg~o;:d 1;;>" 11 fidel, It WH' "is llnn""tHnning t"aUhe.,existing buffer from the roadway wilt be <br />removed which will result in light and noise pollution. He suggested that the entire west edge of <br />the wetland area be lined with large pine trees in order to protect the residences from noise and <br />lights. He also supported the idea of permanent restroom facilities. <br /> <br />With regard to traffic issues, Mr. Coopet stated that he was confused about what the ultimate <br />results will be. He agreed with Councilmember Aptikowski that two lanes each way should be <br />provided. He drives this roadway every day and felt that reducing the lanes of traffic will be <br />problematic. Although slowing traffic down may be necessary, there must also be a flow of <br />traffic. He felt that Bethel College and the City should take a step back and review the situation. <br /> <br />Mr. Coopet asked why the City Council has not asked the residents to present the City with a <br />mitigation plan. He stated that Bethel College was trying to cram too much into a small area. He .- <br />felt that Bethel College should be compelled to come forth with an alternative plan that the City .. <br />could seriously consider and decide which plan would be the best for all involved. At the <br />beginning of this project, Bethel College invited the residents to comment on the plans. <br />However, no substantive changes have been made. <br /> <br />Mr. Coopet stated that there were many issues and problems that must be solved with regard to <br />the intersection as well as the design of the plan and how it will affect the residents. He asked <br />that the City Council seriously consider tabling or rejecting the proposal until a serious <br />independent traffic engineering study is completed. <br /> <br />Mr. Pomeroy noted that the athletic complex had first been developed when the project was to be <br />a joint effort with the City of Arden Hills and the current plan was based on the early concepts. <br />He indicated that one major change to the plan was to move the tennis courts from the City <br />property. Additionally, infiltration and mitigation of the wetlands was added and safety issues <br />have been addressed. He indicated that Bethel College would be willing to develop additional <br />landscaping along the fence as suggested by Councilmember Larson. <br /> <br />Mr. Coopet suggested that a citizen group be formed to help make final decisions. He felt that <br />issues brought up by the residents had not been taken into consideration by Bethel College. <br />Mayor Probst noted that the proposal had been through the Parks and Recreation Committee as <br />well as the Planning Commission. He believed that the proposal has had a thorough review. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Corbin Kristufek, 1640 Chatham Avenue, stated that when this project was proposed as a <br />joint effort with the City, Mr. Fritsinger had informed him that it was too early for the residents <br />