My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-01-07-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
08-01-07-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 11:23:49 AM
Creation date
9/17/2007 11:23:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
08-01-07 Worksession Minutes
General - Type
Minutes
Date
8/1/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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 />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION - AUGUST 1, 2007 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />Councihnember McClung seconded what Councilmember Grant and Councilmember <br />Holden said, low density is still above what we want. It seems that we are putting in an <br />Excelsior and Grand type density into Arden Hills. <br /> <br />Conncilmember Grant commented that the water feature had disappeared from the plans. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated that the water feature is a necessary feature of any <br />development these days. <br /> <br />Steven. Bubul stated that RRLD is using the current concept; it would be more helpful ifthe <br />Council would say that this is not what we want. <br /> <br />Councihnember Holden feels like RRLD is leading the charge, not us. <br /> <br />Stacie Kvilvang paraphrased, the message we want to take back is that the lowest density <br />numbers they provided is not low enough. We also want to see the model in 3D and there <br />are no big lots out there. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated that we need to model population. <br /> <br />Summary: Density is still too high, commercial too high, need 3D models to see what it <br />looks and feels like, do not like finger parks. General consensus was that they do not want <br />to move forward with any concept until Highway 10/96 is decided. <br /> <br />Council discussed expectations: Helpful to get info matrix on what RRLD's position is; <br />Council likes summary discussions; updates are more important than a meeting. They <br />directed that staff schedule a meeting with us if you think that it is important. Ifthere is <br />nothing to report then tell them there is nothing to report. <br /> <br />Councihnember Grant stated that he wants the financial capacity of this project, why <br />approve until we know what the numbers are? <br /> <br />Stacie K vilvang stated that the developer is using an 8% fee on the land. They will always <br />back into that number. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant wants to know what the capacity is in total. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated that they agreed to a purchase price, now they say that they <br />assumed demolition was included in that price (which it is not) - they need to know what <br />they are doing. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated that he wants a development that works. <br /> <br />Stacie Kvilvang stated that she would work through some examples with Councilmember <br />Holmes. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.