Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 9, 2021 3 <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Subramanian requested further information regarding the 15% increase in units <br />per acre. <br /> <br />Planning Consultant Kansier explained as the language is written now, a 15% increase would <br />be allowed in the units per acre which would allow for 23 units per acre. <br /> <br />Commissioner Weber asked if the area north of County Road E was excluded from this change. <br /> <br />Planning Consultant Kansier stated this was the case. <br /> <br />Commissioner Weber questioned if the proposed development could be achieved through a <br />variance. <br /> <br />Planning Consultant Kansier explained this could not done because variances could not be <br />granted to the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Commissioner Weber expressed concern with the amount of latitude that was being granted <br />through the proposed language change. He indicated this amendment required Planning <br />Commission consideration and Council approval. He stated he was concerned that a public <br />hearing was not held for this matter. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zimmerman stated it appears amenities have been taken away from independent <br />living units in order to increase the density for tenants that need additional services and would no <br />longer have access to a movie theater or restaurant. <br /> <br />Planning Consultant Kansier reported this would be covered more clearly in the next Planning <br />Case. She indicated this may not be the case, as amenities were just rearranged. <br /> <br />Chair Vijums commented he read the next Planning Case and noted there was more room for a <br />chapel and theater if they were combined. He stated this was a more efficient use of the space and <br />the amenities were not going away. He agreed this Planning Case was worthy of a public hearing <br />and understood this would be done at the City Council meeting. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes explained the City Council would be holding a public hearing. She <br />requested clarification on the area where the amendment would apply. <br /> <br />Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed a map noting the parcels that would be included in the <br />proposed code amendment. <br /> <br />Chair Vijums questioned who designated the areas within the amendment. <br /> <br />Planning Consultant Kansier stated this would have been done within the Comprehensive Plan <br />update which was adopted a little over a year ago. <br /> <br />Chair Vijums commented there may be more concern about the language itself than the area that <br />is being covered. He discussed how this area of Arden Hills would be impacted if all of the areas <br />in pink were high density residential and noted this was a concern to him.