My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 10-15-2002
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
CCP 10-15-2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:17:28 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 4:06:20 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.
/
76
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 />, <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />SEPTEMBER 30, 2002 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />5. PUBLIC HEARINGS <br /> <br />None. <br /> <br />6. COMMUNITY SERVICES <br /> <br />A. PLANNING <br /> <br />1. Planning Case No. 02-20: Aaron Nelson, Master and Final Plan PUD <br />Amendment, County Road D and Cleveland Avenue <br /> <br />Mr. Parrish explained the applicant was requesting an amendment to a previously <br />approved Master and Final Planned Unit Development to construct an office <br />building at the comer of County Road D and Cleveland Avenue. He stated the <br />Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions as outlined in the <br />staffs report dated September 25,2002. <br /> <br />. Mayor Probst expressed disappointment that this was back before the Council and <br />stated he was not in support of this proposal. <br /> <br />Council Member Grant stated he understood the developer was trying to come up <br />with the best possible development, but the developer should realize they needed <br />to meet the building material standards and stated he was not in support of this <br />design. <br /> <br />Council Member Rem agreed with many of the comments made by the Planning <br />Commission. She expressed concerns about screening. She stated she was not in <br />favor of this proposal. <br /> <br />Council Member Aplikowski stated the whole scope changed from the first <br />presentation. She indicated the first building seemed a more friendly approach to <br />the neighborhood, and she did not believe this new proposal was as friendly to the <br />neighborhood. She stated she did not agree with the building materials being <br />proposed for this new building. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Steve Nelson, stated they made the building larger due to more interest from the <br />tenants, but also because of structural issues. He indicated the footprint was <br />actually smaller, however. He stated part of the problem was the stairwell. He <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.