Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 07-18-2005 . . . " ~ ~HILLS Approved: August 8, 2005 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 18, 2005, 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL 1. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Beverly Aplikowski called to order the Special City Council meeting at 7:30 p.m. Present: Mayor Beverly Aplikowski, Councilmembers David Grant, Gregg Larson, Lois Rem, and Brenda Holden. Absent: None. Also present were City Administrator, Michelle Wolfe; City Attorney, Jerry Filla; Director of Operations & Maintenance, Thomas Moore; Finance Director/Treasurer, Murtuza Siddiqui; Community Development Director, Scott Clark; City Engineer, Greg Brown; City Planner, Pete Hellegers; and Recording Secretary, Kathleen Altman. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. 20 APPROVAL OF MINUTES None 3. CONSENT CALENDAR None 4, PUBLIC INOUlRIES/INFORMATIONAL None. . . . ~ ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 2 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 6. NEW BUSINESS None. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Resolution No. 05-45: Approval of Roval Oaks Special Use Permit (old Citv Hall site) Mr. Clark reviewed staffs report and requested Council consider the Resolution which would approve the requested Master and Final PUD, PUD Permit, and Preliminary Plat for the redevelopment of the old City Hall/Public Works property as a 7-building, 30-unit, office condominium complex by Royal Oaks Realty. He indicated staff had met with the developer subsequent to the July 11, 2005 City Council meeting and discussed issues raised by the City Council and residents. Mr. Clark reviewed the approval Resolutions and the Environmental Assessment Worksheet requirements. Marcell Eibensteiner, President of Royal Oaks Realty, stated the building would be maintenance free with both the building and sidewalk being built on a sand cushion. He indicated he would add downspouts on all of the buildings, which would go directly into the storm sewer, and this would lead to dry sidewalks in the winter season. He stated he wanted to build a quality project in the City and he would remain on the Board for a year after the project was built. He noted his brother would be on the Association Board and he was selling the building to him. He stated he would irrigate the complete area and if any landscaping died, the association would replace it. Councilmember Holden asked if they are using the same materials as they used in a previous development. Mr. Eibensteiner replied they had a similar development in Eden Prairie with the exception they would be using Hardy Board instead of stucco. He noted he might also upgrade to Timberline shingles. Councilmember Grant asked how was the City was proposing that the developer would make good on his promises. Mr. Rellegers replied there would be a legal document recorded with the County that would ensure everything was done properly, as well as the City Engineer, himself, and the building official would be responsible for reviewing the plans for compliance. 2 . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 3 Councilmember Grant requested the improvements the developer referred to be put into the PUD as a part of the plan and requested those improvements be documented. Mayor Aplikowski noted this was voluntary on the part of the developer, but she agreed it should be made part of the PUD. Councilmember Holden asked if the building materials being used were standard building materials for the City. Mr. Hellegers reviewed the standard materials and believed these buildings would blend in well architecturally with the commercial and residential areas. He noted the brick and Hardy Board were maintenance free materials, which would add to the quality of the development. He indicated architectural appeal was one thing the developer could take to a buyer to get businesses into the units. Mayor Aplikowski noted Council had a request to have some residents speak to the Council, and if there was anyone that had anything new to add they were invited to speak to the Council. She noted there would be a three-minute time limit for comments. Bobbi Huot, 1468 Arden View Drive, noted change was not easy and they could not stop progress. She stated there was an extreme level of discomfort as to how the Council and Mayor had heard their concerns with this development. She expressed concern about the traffic study and asked who had followed up on the study. She indicated the study did not include two issues - the TCAAP and Guidant developments, which would impact the traffic in this area and that traffic study should have included those developments. She noted there was not a feasibility study done or a hydrology study done. She indicated the Rice Creek Watershed District study was not completed. She stated there were serious water issues in the area. She indicated the citizens needed a level of satisfaction that everything had been done that could be done. She stated there was an environmental issue also including the loss of green space and she requested the City do an environmental study of this area. She noted there was a lot of wildlife in the area. She stated nobody heard at the last meeting from the traffic engineer. She stated the citizens wanted to address these issues with him but he was not available at the meetings. Dick Klick, Arden Hills resident, stated in the studies it referred to this as a residential intersection. He noted Hamline Avenue was not a residential street, nor had it ever been a residential street. He indicated Hamline Avenue was an arterial route between Highway 96 and Interstate 694. He asked if it was not a residential street, but an arterial route, what are the other considerations. He acknowledged there was not an easy answer. He noted the decision was that this area was no longer going to be residential at this end of the City. City Engineer Greg Brown stated the questions predominantly pertains to the radius and from their review, the type of traffic that would traverse between the access and Hamline Avenue would need a 30- foot radius, which was the type of radius that would serve his area well and would serve the traffic increase while a 50-foot radius was not necessary. He noted they were very comfortable with that recommendation. . Mayor Aplikowski acknowledged there was a problem with traffic on Hamline Avenue, but this development did not create the traffic problems and they needed to address the solution to the problem, but stopping the development would not fix the problem of traffic on Hamline Avenue 3 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 4 and they were looking for other answers for that. She stated there had to be further discussions regarding traffic on Hamline Avenue. Kathy Sukke, 1286 Karth Lake Circle, stated they already had a sign to not turn right on red, which did not work. She asked why the Council was willing to exacerbate the problem. She believed another sign would not help. She expressed concern for the safety of the school buses. She indicated Karth Lake Circle residents would never be able to get out of their street. She expressed concern that the feasibility study had not been done. She expressed concern about the impervious surface with this development and she believed the parking lot was too large. Dave Ehresman, 1481 Arden View Drive, suggested a west turn lane westbound on Highway 96, which would not allow an access onto Hamline Avenue. He stated he had emailed the Council with his suggestion in detail. Councilmember Holden asked if staff had seen the report from the Rice Creek Watershed District. Mr. Hellegers replied the City had received a Conditional Approval Pending Receipt Of Changes (CAPROC) and prior to the development going forward and obtaining a permit, the developer had to make changes to their plans, which would be reviewed by the District and then a permit would be issued. He stated Rice Creek Watershed District was waiting on soil borings and the shifting of one building so it would not impact the wetland. Councilmember Grant asked if the two inches of runoff assumed there would be some drainage into the soil or would it go into the pond. He asked if the pond was sufficient. Mr. Brown stated the pond would hold a 2.S-inch rainfall event, not including the drainage into the soil. He stated there would also be capacity for a lOO-year flooding event, which was a 6-inch rainfall in a 24- hour period and the sewer system did meet that requirement. He stated the two wetlands on site did not have natural outlets today, but the development would add outlets to the storm sewer system, which would address any flooding concerns. He noted the water would run through two ponding systems prior to getting to Sunfish Lake. He stated the pond elevation near the daycare center was lower than the daycare center so they were comfortable with this pond. Councilmember Holden asked if Wetland A would also flow into the storm sewer direction. Mr. Brown responded that was correct. He indicated the plumbing would be in place so none of the wetlands would flow off of the site. Peter Upsall, Children's World, indicated they were concerned about safety and adding to the traffic would make this a lot worse. He noted the road would run along side their infants and toddlers playground and asked how would the children be protected from the dust, sand, etc. He also expressed concern about the drainage pond. Bobbie Huot asked how the parcel was marketed. Mr. Clark responded the City had received a Letter of Intent from Royal Oaks Realty and they had an appraisal of the property done. He noted in January, the Council directed staff to determine if there were any other projects that were interested in the site. He noted they had received some interest, but those inquires did not match the intent of the zoning. 4 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY IS, 2005 5 . Ms. Huot asked if the Purchase Agreement was contingent upon the PUD approvaL Mr. Clark stated if the PUD was not approved, the developer had the right to cancel the Purchase Agreement. Mso Huot asked if any Councilmember had any personal dealings or business interests with Royal Oaks Realty. The Councilmembers responded they did not. Councilmember Rem asked for an explanation and summary ofthe traffic study. Dan Soler, Traffic Engineer Ramsey County Public Works, stated the County tried to determine what kind of trips were likely to be generated from a development and once they determined how much traffic a development would generate, they needed to then look at where the traffic would be coming from. He indicated after that they reviewed the development plan for proper turn lanes, signals, signage, etc. He stated he had worked with staff on this and had contributed to the recommendations. Councilmember Grant asked what was the possibility of putting in a left turn lane on westbound Highway 96. Mr. Soler responded the County did not support this and would not approve of any additional left turn movements on Highway 96. He noted this was a safety issue and not a cost Issue. . Mike Spack, Traffic Study Engineer from Traffic Data Inc., explained the process he went through when preparing a traffic study. He noted with the additional driveway, this would give people choices and allow them alternatives to get out. He indicated he was a licensed engineer by the State and he had gone through extensive training in traffic engineering. He stated he had prepared the study, but both the City Engineer and the County Engineer had reviewed his study. Mr. Clark stated what Mr. Spick said was accurate and this was one of the tools they used to analyze this project. Jim Orutt, 1387 Arden View Drive, stated he had purchased his unit a little over three years ago and what he found in Arden Hills was unique. He stated this was a community and the community was very concerned about their quality of life. He noted something would be lost and changed forever if this development was approved. He requested they look at the communities' feelings, in addition to the studies. Ms. Huot stated she saw many contradictions in the Traffic Study and believed that this project would double the traffic in the future. Mr. Spack responded Ms. Huot was misinterpreting the report. . Mike Black, Royal Oaks Realty, thanked the City for their time and review process. He noted there was a neighborhood meeting held in late March and they had tried to address the residents' issues. He indicated the number one issue at the neighborhood meeting was traffic, which they addressed with a traffic study. With respect to the EA W, he understood there was a petition for 5 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 6 one that went to the State and he had requested a copy of that report, but he had not received the report until he came to the meeting tonight. He stated they did have to consider the EA W and noted there were certain State guidelines that needed to be followed for an EA W. He noted the Council needed to make a determination as to whether there was a potential for a significant environmental review. He indicated the threshold for an EA W was 200,000 square feet, while their project was under the threshold significantly. He noted if there were valid concerns of an environmental impact, then that needed to be addressed, but he did not believe this development would have a significant environmental impact. He stated they had worked closely with staff and did a lot of compromising. He believed the issues had been addressed. He stated he had 25 years of experience in planning with 16 years of those years as a consultant for Cities. He stated he had experience in land use planning and he believed they were bringing a quality project to the City. He indicated the development was appropriate for this land use. He stated they had come forward with a very good project and this was a perfect development for this area. He stated it was designed to blend into the residential neighborhood to the south. He indicated change was hard, but this proj ect would be the best they could get for this parcel in this area. Councilmember Larson requested they close the public comment period. Mayor Aplikowski agreed and did so at 9:00 p.m. Councilmember Larson stated he had done a lot of homework on this and answered many phone calls and emails. He noted there was no such thing as a perfect decision, but at some point they needed to make a decision. He stated he was speaking only for himself, but he tried to make sure he understood the proposal and the residents' concerns. He noted he understood there was a concern with the access on Hamline Avenue, which he spoke about at the last meeting, in addition to signage and parking. He stated one thing he saw with the emails, was that the citizens did not want to develop this property. He noted the City had always intended to replenish the funds that they used for the new Maintenance facility by selling this land. He stated personally, he did not believe the City could afford to make this a public park because the cost would be 1.3 million dollars. He stated this area was never targeted for park or open space. He indicated 1,500 acres would be left as open space and parkland in the TCAAP development. He stated there was no basis for a need for additional park and open space. He stated he had a hard time coming up with justification for not doing anything on this site. He noted the developer had a good plan in terms of appearance. He stated this was not a good location for residential development, but believed this development would look similar to a townhome development with attractive buildings. He noted the buildings would provide a buffer to Highway 96 noise. He acknowledged this was not a perfect solution, but what the developer had proposed was a good solution for the City. He stated he did not support and he would not vote for an access onto Harnline Avenue. He stated Hamline Avenue would only get busier and there was not a good solution, but by returning an easement, if in the future an access was needed, it cOllld be added. He stated by not adding it now, they eliminated a lengthy road and would not create an unsafe access. He indicated he was not comfortable with the signage as proposed. He noted he had looked at other developments and generally these types of developments did not have as much signage as they were proposing. He stated he would not vote for this is if the development was "cluttered" up with signs. He indicated he could compromise and let a larger monument sign on Highway 96 be put in place. He stated he 6 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 7 . was comfortable with respect to parking spaces. With respect to the EA W, he believed they had enough information now and did not believe anything would be gained by an EA W. He stated he would not support an EA W. He thanked the citizens for their comments, calls, and emails. . Councilmember Grant thanked the residents for the phone calls, letters, emails, pictures, and comments. He stated he had also done a lot of research on this, including visiting other office parks and his comments were very similar to Councilmember Larson. He believed this was a nice high quality office building, but they were proposing too much signage. He noted he did not want this to look like a strip mall development. He stated he liked the townhouse development look, but that feeling would be removed with too much signage. He stated he would not support this with the signage as proposed. He indicated he would be in support of a larger monument sign along Highway 96. He stated he would like to see more green space and trees and he would not support a development of more than 70,000 square feet and this was the number that everyone went in with. He noted this would be a reduction of 4,000 square feet and a reduction of 16 parking stalls and those parking stalls could add to the green space and trees. With respect to the EA W, he believed they had enough information and was not necessary and would not change the final outcome of the development. With respect to the access onto Hamline Avenue, he was concerned that if they had only one access off of Highway 96, it would create additional "U" turns by 50 percent. He stated he was not sure if he liked the access on Hamline Avenue, and he believed they needed to solve the problem on Hamline Avenue. He noted Hamline Avenue traffic would only get worse, with or without this development and he was in support of the access on Hamline Avenue. He stated the City and County had to work together to solve the traffic problems on Hamline Avenue. He stated he needed to see changes on the signage and the overall square footage ofthe project in order to support it. Councilmember Rem stated she was not in favor of an access on Hamline A venue, but she also did not like one access onto Highway 96 either. She stated whatever happened on Hamline Avenue, she hoped the developer worked with the City. She believed the EA W was not necessary in this case and the environmental issues had been covered previously. She stated she was in agreement with the signage being reduced also. Councilmember Holden asked if 306 parking spaces were necessary. Mr. Hellegers replied staff had a standard set that they worked from for office space. He indicated the developer felt this was the amount of parking they needed on this development. He noted they wanted to make sure the parking lot was built large enough to accommodate all of the cars parking on site. He indicated there was no other place for people to park, except in the parking lot. Councilmember Holden stated when this proposal first came to them in October it was quoted as 40,000 square feet and as things moved along, it was now 74,000 square feet plus with less green space. She stated she was not sure if this was in the spirit of the neighborhood business zoning, even though it met all of the requirements. She stated this was way too dense for this area and she could live with it if there was more green space. She stated she was not sure she could support this as proposed. . Mayor Aplikowski stated they first needed to deal with the EA W. 7 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 8 Councilmember Larson noted a residential development would still have the minimum distance between the building and lot line of 30 feet. MOTION: Mayor Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded to approve Resolution 05-47, Finding the Negative Declaration for the Preparation for an Environmental Assessment Workshop for the Planned Unit Development, PUD Permit, and Preliminary Plat for Royal Oaks Realty, The motion carried unanimously (5-0), Mr. Filla stated the Council needed to respond to the development as proposed, unless the developer agreed with the revised conditions, otherwise it was the Councilmembers' development and not the developer's development. He noted that making substantial changes, without the developer's approval, would change the development. Mro Eibensteiner stated he has decided to go along with a 2 x 2 sign outside the door, but he would like to do some advertising on the doorway also, Mr. Filla stated all they could do tonight was agree to look at the signage and have it come back to staff for approval. Councilmember Larson stated he would like to see the 2 x 2 signs outside of the doors only, MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to amend the amended condition 9 on signage that the signage does not exceed 2 x 2 and this come back to the Council for final approval. The motion carried unanimously (5-0), Mayor Aplikowski stated she was not in opposition with a logo on a door, since they had drastically reduced the signage, Councilmember Grant stated he was pleased to see the signage was moving more toward an office park setting rather than a strip mall look. Councilmember Grant stated believed the Purchase Agreement addressed square footage up to 70,000 square feet and he was proposing to have this development not exceed 70,000 square feet. He indicated a small reduction in square footage would add to the green space. Mr. Filla asked if what he was asking was to add an additional condition that the square footage would not exceed 70,000 square feet. Mr. Eibensteiner responded they were willing to give up unit 20, which consists of 3,260 square feet as well as an equivalent amount of parking, Mayor Aplikowski asked if they could leave the number of parking spots to match the equivalent amount of the reduction without specifically putting a number on it at this meeting, Mr. Filla suggested condition number 20 read: That the project to be scaled back by eliminating unit 20 and the parking space that would be allocated for that square footage. 8 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18,2005 9 . MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to add Condition number 20 to read: That the project be scaled back by eliminating unit 20 and the parking space that would be allocated for that square footage. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Councilmember Larson requested Condition 17 Hamline Avenue exit be stricken. He believed this would be the right decision for the access to the property. He noted there were advantages, such as eliminating the need for a lengthy access road and eliminating the need to clear the land, which would leave a buffer to the residential areas. He stated by doing this, they always had the option in the future to add the access if necessary. He stated they were not closing down any options, but he wanted to see if this development would work without the access. Mr. Filla asked how strongly did they feel about preserving the future possibility and if they felt very strongly about it, they should preserve an easement now so that they did not need to acquire the easement in the future. Councilmember Larson stated he would like to maintain an easement on the property. . MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to strike Condition 17 and to replace it with a reservation of a potential future access over the proposed road shown on the plat from the westerly border of the daycare property westerly to the point that is approximately north of Block 9 of the Townhouse Villages North, First Addition. Mayor Aplikowski requested staff specifically define the wording of the motion to ensure it was accurate. Councilmember Grant stated he would not vote in favor of the motion because he was concerned about the required "U" turns. He understood the concerns about Hamline Avenue, but this would not solve any problems along Hamline Avenue. Mayor Aplikowski stated she had asked staff to start the dialogue with Ramsey County about putting in a stoplight somewhere on Hamline Avenue and to also look at the budget for a stoplight. She acknowledged they needed to fix the problem. She agreed this was not a solution to the problem, but it would give them some time to look at the problem and still move fOlWard. The motion carried (4-1 Councilmember Grant opposed). Councilmember Grant inquired about the quality specifications of the parking lot. Mr. Rellegers replied the City had a standard for commercial parking lots and the City Engineer would review the plans to make sure they met the standards for development. . Councilmember Grant inquired about the sub-grade and the depth of the bituminous of the parking lot. Mr. Brown replied he would review the plans and ensure they met the standards. 9 . . . '. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 10 Mr. Filla asked if Condition I would show the details for the final project. Mr. Brown responded the details would be shown for approval on the final project. Conncilmember Larson stated the developer had volunteered two items that he would like added to the Conditions. One of the items being that the landscaped areas would be irrigated by the applicant and the second that gutters would cany stormwater directly to the storm water system without drainage over land. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to add the following Condition 21: The landscaped areas be irrigated by the applicant and the addition of gutters to carry the stormwater directly to the stonn water system without drainage over land. Councilmember Grant requested one more item be added to the motion: The one- foot of sand cushion base is added for the sidewalk. Councilmember Larson accepted the amendment. Mro Filla suggested Condition 21 read: The final plans be revised to illustrate the landscaped area will be irrigated, that there be downspouts and gutters added to the structures to convey the water directly to the storm water drainage system, and that they illustrate a one- foot of sand base to the sidewalk. Mayor Aplikowski requested the one-foot of sand cushion to the sidewalk be added as Condition 22 and be addressed as a separate motion. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). MOTION: Mayor Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to add Condition 22 to read as follows: One-foot sand cushion to the sidewalk be provided. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Mr. Clark asked for clarification with respect to signage. He asked if the motion implied the removal of the 60-square foot sign by unit 26-30. Mayor Aplikowski noted they had not addressed that issue. Councilmember Holden stated seeing as they were not allowing an access onto Hamline Avenue, she did not see the need for a 60-square foot sign by unit 26-30 at this time. Councilmember Grant stated he believed the intent of that sign was to have it visible from Highway 96. Councilmember Larson stated his intent was to limit the signs by the doorways to 2 x 2 foot and the only other signage then would be the monument sign sitting on Highway 96. Mayor Aplikowski noted that was really restrictive. 10 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18,2005 11 Councilmember Larson noted this was a destination development and he did not believe whether anyone would be going to this development because they saw a sign on Highway 96 and that was his intent on voting yes on the amendment and he believed the monument sign on Highway 96 was sufficient. Mr. Filla stated he believed the Motion was to have a not to exceed a 2 x 2 foot sign. He stated another way to say this was that each unit should have four square feet in signage including a one-foot address and nameplate plaque adjacent to the entry for the unit. Councilmember Larson indicated that was his intent and he would make another motion to make this clear. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to limit the signage to four square foot signs adjacent to the entrances of each unit, including a one-foot square foot address nameplate, and there be no other signs applied to the exterior of the buildings. Councilmember Rem asked if he was still approving the illumination of the signage with lighting, or was he also striking that. Mayor Aplikowski stated she believed there should be a light above the sign. Councilmember Larson replied he was comfortable leaving the lighting above the signage. Mayor Aplikowski requested this come back to Council for final review. The motion carried unanimously (4-1 Mayor Aplikowski opposed). Councilmember Grant stated item C on Page 2 of the PUD permit was in need of adjustment. He asked if they needed to change the number of units to 29 now that they were dropping a unit. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to amend item 2.0.c read: 29 Office condominiums versus 30. Note: Motion Ilot voted Oil. Mr. Clark pointed out there were many other changes that would need to be made also in the PUD permit. Mr. Filla suggested Council say the conditions attached to the permit should be amended to reflect the conditions of approval. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Mayor Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve Resolution #05-45, approving a Planned Unit Development, PUD Permit, and Preliminary Plat for Royal Oaks Realty with the conditions as amended. Councilmember Grant stated based on the motion there would be only one exit and entrance, which meant there would be "U" turns necessary. He asked Mr. Soler if this was acceptable. Mr. 11 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 12 Soler replied the "U" turns at Highway 96 and Hamline A venue would not be a concern. He indicated the left turns on Keithson and Highway 96 were problematic, but there was a left turn lane and width there so they would not initially propose to post a no "U" turn unless they received a lot of complaints or accidents. He noted a "U" turn was not a good move if they could not make it, but in this case, the biggest thing would be ifthere were big enough gaps in traffic on Highway 96. He noted this would not be as safe of a move as at a protected signal, but right now they were not experiencing problems with "U" turns. The motion failed (3-2 Councilmembers Grant and Holden opposed). Mr. Filla noted this needed four votes to be approved. Mayor Aplikowski asked if Councilmember Grant was opposing this due to access concerns. Councilmember Grant replied that was his objection. Councilmember Larson stated he believed the Council made a terrible mistake tonight. He stated the City was foregoing 1.3 million dollars in City revenue with no plans as to how they were going to use this land and he believed if the reason for voting against this was because of the access point not being present, they provided in the conditions that if there was a need demonstrated in the future, that they reserved the easement. Councilmemher Holden noted Councilmember Grant had stated if the access were approved he would vote against this so she did not understand why he would be surprised by Councilmember Grant's vote against not having an access. Councilmember Larson replied he understood Councilmember Grant's vote in opposition to this, but he did not understand her vote in opposition as she had not stated her opinion. He believed the Council had made a big mistake tonight and they had now turned down revenue that would offer the City 1.3 million dollars. Councilmember Grant asked what would show that an access is needed on Highway 96. He stated he had looked at this development and he believed the developer had come up with a good plan and that the access on Hamline A venue should have been there and they should work on the access on Hamline Avenue. He agreed this was not a bad project and maybe it would come back to them with a slightly different form. Councilmember Larson stated he believed the same risk existed with right and left hand turns out of Hamline A venue, but they left their options open if they proved they were incorrect. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Ms. Wolfe - None Councilmember Holden - None 12 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 13 Councilmember Grant - None Councilmember Rem - None Councilmember Larson - None Mayor Aplikowski - None Mayor Aplikowski adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 10:15 p.m. (J(~ ,J/J~ Michelle Wolfe City Administrator o ~ f};/'~~' /Beverly plik wski Mayor NOTICE OF MEETINGS The next Council Meeting will be held Monday, August 8, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the Arden Hills Council Chambers. 13