08-29-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2005 4 . Councilmember Holden asked if they renegotiated with Royal Oaks Realty, would the existing Purchase Agreement be null and void. Mr. Clark responded that was correct. Mayor Aplikowski asked if they did nothing, when would it be necessary they look at this again. Mr. Clark replied they would need to look at this again in the nexl couple of years before all of the reports previously prepared were outdated. Council member Grant stated he would not support retail or restaurant businesses on this site. Mr. Clark responded retail or restaurant businesses would not be allowed. Mayor Aplikowski noted a number of residents wanted to speak and asked Council if they wanted to hear the comments. Councilmember Larson noted Council has heard many hours of resident comments and indicated he would support only new information being presented. Councilmember Grant noted the proposed design was previously lumed down by Council, so it was not necessary to address Ihe design. He indicated he would like to receive comments on the three options being presented to Council tonight. . Stan Harpstead, 1277 Nnrsery Hill Lane, thanked Council for honoring the community's core values. He believed a new purchase agreement was in order and recognized redevelopment was necessary. He stated timing of this was also sensitive and encouraged Council to tie the community together with the TCAAP development. He asked Council to have an open bidding process for this property. Rebecca Hauch-Schmid, 1313 Karth Lake Circle, requested Council keep in mind that whatever happens with the property that they stay true to the integrity of the neighborhood. She noted there were a lot of children in the area and that this was a neighborhood. She asked they preserve their neighborhoods. Gale Van Bnskirk, 1390 Arden View Drive, requested Council keep in mind inflation with the price of the property. She requested a new purchase agreement indicate a specific sized development. She believed the purchase price was too low and requested they also look at this. She asked why let a purchaser pay 2004 prices (appraisal in November 2004) for property in 2006? She noted property values increase due to inflation. She noted the current Purchase Agreement did not address extensions or changes to the agreement and asked how would this be legally amended. She indicated the current Purchase Agreement was not specific as to the development size, in that it states "an office/condominium project of approximately 70,000 square feet." She asked why the size was not specified, at least with an upper limit. She asked if other developers could submit their proposals for developing the property if Royal Oaks proposal is not . extended. She indicated the purchase price in the Purchase Agreement is extremely low compared to a current Arden Hills commercial property with offer pending_ As understood, Collins