Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />JUNE 27, 2005 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson asked if berming was discussed as a way to screen the station from <br />Highway 96. Mr. Hellegers replied there was not a lot of space for a berm, but it would meet the <br />capacity requirement. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated he believed the City needed to try and do a better job of sticking <br />to the kind of building materials they wanted to see on buildings and noted efface was being used <br />in the construction of this building, but efface did not have the quality they wanted and was not <br />consistent with the design standard requirements. He stated he wanted to see building material <br />other than efface. Mr. Clark stated a 100 percent brick building looked too institutional, so they <br />were trying to come up with a building that had a predominant amount of brick, but also <br />incorporated other materials that had interesting architecture. He noted efface would break up the <br />architecture. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson believed there were other alternatives to use other than efface, that <br />would lend quality to the building. He noted this building was a gateway to the City and it was a <br />good place to start being as demanding as they could to put in a quality development. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski asked what would the alternative building material be if they did not use <br />efface. Councilmember Larson replied the developer could use a white ceramic brick if they <br />wanted a contrast with the red brick or a precast material. He noted there were other alternatives . <br />out there. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated the Planning Commission minutes tend to imply that the Planning <br />Commission voted unanimously for approval, but noted the Chair of the Planning Commission <br />was absent, so it was a 6-0 vote. However, it was still a unanimous vote with the members who <br />were present. He stated it appeared that some of the columns were brick and some efface. He <br />asked if that was an error. Mr. Hellegers replied the columns he was referring to were for the car <br />wash entrance. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked if the applicant had submitted any color photographs of any of <br />their other stations with this design. Mr. Hellegers replied they had not submitted photographs of <br />those stations, but they did have a sample board. <br /> <br />Victor Sacco, Sr. Manager of Real Estate for Holiday Companies Holiday Station Stores, <br />presented the sample board. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked if there would be larger caliper trees put in. Mr. Hellegers <br />replied most of the trees would be in 2-3 caliper inch range, with some 3 - 4\1, inch caliper <br />category. He noted if they could save some of the trees, those trees could be countcd toward the <br />landscaping rcquirement. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden agreed with Councihnember Larson's comments regarding the efface. . <br />Mr. Hellegers noted efface was a small component of the building, with brick being <br />approximately 80 percent of the building. He also indicated there was additional glass added to <br />the site and the building was a nice looking building. <br /> <br />4 <br />