My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 11-26-2001
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
CCP 11-26-2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:16:27 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 2:35:44 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.
/
158
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 />i~ <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL- OCTOBER 29, 2001 <br /> <br />;' <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Mr Parrish stated based on tbe level ofinfonnation the Council has asked for, he did not think e <br />there was anything available short of a traffic study. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated it seemed reasonable to holdover this over until the worksession. <br />He noted to deny the application tonight would delay the developer even further. <br /> <br />Mr Lynch stated that two years ago the City Council thought it appropriate to zone this <br />neighborhood business. He asked if any of the factors would change the Councilmembers' <br />minds in three weeks. He stated the Comprehensive Plan was a 20-year window on the city. He <br />noted ifit was not the Council's intent to go down that path, it should deny this application <br />tonight. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem stated she wanted to see information on whether this plan would fit the site <br />and how it would impact the neighborhood. She noted she was still willing to look at this plan <br />for that parcel. <br /> <br />Couneilmember Aplikowski stated there was going to be traffic there if the zoning stays the way <br />it currently is. She noted if the site remains Neighborhood Business, a developer would propose <br />two exits. She added in her opinion traffic would not get any better if the property remains <br />Neighborhood Business. She asked if the Council wanted to change that corner. She stated <br />traffic should be number six on the list since there would always be traffic on the site unless they <br />left the property the way it is now. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr Kjersten stated he could reduce the roofline to make it fit as to height. He noted he did not <br />want to do that since that would be a 1 970s style. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated if two of the Councilmembers did not feel it should be re20ned, <br />then it did not matter what additional information is given. . <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated if the application was not going anywhere, it was not fair to ask the <br />developer to continue to spend money on the site. <br /> <br />Couneilmember Grant stated he was willing to entertain this plan as a viable option. He asked <br />whether there were tlrree others who felt that way. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated the Developer would be spending the money at his risk. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem stated if she knew what she would vote in tlrree weeks, she would state it <br />now. She noted in her mind it was worth the risk. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated he was not going to give his opinion right now. <br /> <br />Councilmemher Rem asked if there was any possibility of scaling down the size of project. Mr. <br />Kjersten responded he could not scale it down. He stated the land was too expensive to do this A. <br />project without Bethel College. WI' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.