06-25-12-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—JUNE 25, 2012 8 Councilmember Holden confirmed that when Walgreen's was going in on the corner, a moratorium was put in place to give the City time to discuss the vision for the area. This is not the first time the City has put a moratorium into effect. Mayor Grant agreed that a moratorium is not unprecedented. Councilmember Werner indicated that there are a lot of loose ends on the old Holiday Inn project. He thought if the proposal was denied, it would go back to the Planning Commission so the developer could address concerns and answer questions. Councilmember Holden responded that once a proposal is denied, it is done and there is nothing left to discuss. Councilmember Werner acknowledged that once a proposal is denied, the applicant would have to submit a new proposal. Councilmember Tamble stated that he is uncomfortable because there is unfinished business regarding this property and now we are considering a moratorium. Councilmember Holmes noted that the problem is that the City does not have any rules established. She is concerned because we do not currently have written standards, and in order to provide guidance, we need to have standards. Discussion ensued. MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion to approve Ordinance 2012-006 to Remove Multi-Family Dwelling Units as a Permitted Use in the B-2 Zoning District. The motion did not prevail (0-5). MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve Ordinance 2012-005 to Place a Moratorium on the Development of New Multi-Family Dwelling Units in the City of Arden Hills for the Period of One Year. Mayor Grant invited Rob Davidson of TAT Properties to address the Council as an informational item; not to exceed three minutes. Rob Davidson, TAT Properties, expressed his feelings that his project had not been given a fair hearing. His application was turned down by the City Council at the May 14, 2012, meeting for 120 units of multi-family housing and 13,000 feet of specialty retail by reason of an incomplete application. Nine days letter, he received a letter indicating the City was initiating a code amendment to remove multi-family housing in the B-2 District. On June 4, Mr. Davidson resubmitted an application for 120 units of multi-housing and retail. Later that evening, the Planning Commission unanimously rejected the City amendment to remove multi-family housing from the B-2 district. Fourteen days later, Mr. Davidson received another letter from the City