CCP 03-31-2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 29, 2002 6 planning process. He stated the residents were concerned that they were going to also lose the tennis courts. Pat Kern, 1230 Wyncrest Court, expressed concern about the variance of 23 feet and that they should have the building at 55 feet as required by Code. He stated it appeared Guidant was making the assumption that the road would be vacated. He stated Guidant was a good neighbor. Brad Kressler, 1251 Wyncrest Court, asked if they had looked if the new road would be compatible to Fernwood being lost. Mayor Probst stated the City had made a commitment either directly or indirectly with regard to what their anticipated plans were and they would give the residents the opportunity to comment about the plans. He stated this was not an approval of the vacation of Fernwood. He stated he believed the Training Center could be built on that site. He indicated he was comfortable with the approval of the Training Center site plan and the variances as approved, but stated they did have work to do still with any street vacation. Council Member Larson stated the residents had concerns about the height of the buildings, but he believed this building was fairly consistent with the other building, and he believed this building was as far away from the neighborhood as possible. He stated he would support this proposal. Council Member Aplikowski stated one of the concerns she was hearing was how would this impact Cummings Park. Mr. Parrish stated this was a misconception that was out there at this point, but he assured this was in no way related to Cummings Park. Going forward it would alter access if the vacation proceeded forward, but in terms of parking, that issue had been resolved by the Parks Department. He stated there was a solid easement in terms of parking, so it was unlikely the tennis courts would be eliminated. There was sufficient parking available. MOTION: Council Member Aplikowski moved and Council Member Grant seconded a motion to authorize Planning Case 02-05, Guidant, Site Plan ReviewNariance Request subject to findings and conditions. Council Member Rem asked for clarification on the platting process. Mr. Parrish replied Guidant was in the process of preparing their Master PUD and they were looking to consolidate all of their parcels into one parcel. He stated this was a few months out, at a minimum. Mr. Parrish stated this information was also available on the City's website. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). D. Planning Case 02-06: Pilgrim House, Special Use Permit Mr. Parrish explained applicant was requesting an amendment to their existing Special Use Permit to allow a daycare facility at Pilgrim House. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the requesting fmding the proposed use of the Church was an accessory operation that