05-22-23-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — MAY 8, 2023 9 Councilmember Monson stated she believed the action being requested was pro -development. She indicated she was pro -development, noting she wanted the best and highest use on the thumb property. She did not believe looking at other uses would preclude anyone else from bidding. She stated the process may have not been perfect, but she did not believe an imperfect process was not enough to be anti -development. She supported the City showing that it was open for business. Councilmember Rousseau indicated she has heard both sides of this matter. She explained an option would be to send this to the Planning Commission for further consideration which would push this matter out to June. She anticipated if the Council requested the Planning Commission review this matter, the item would not be back before the Council until July some time, which would align well with the July 28 date. Councilmember Holden questioned if the JDA would accept bids and then take more bids if a change was made to the Campus Commercial district. Councilmember Rousseau explained she was simply stating she would like the Planning Commission to consider this matter. Mayor Grant commented this was not like selling a house. He reported developers look for tenants and businesses to build on a site and proposals are built on this information. He indicated developers were given 90 days to complete this work in order to complete a comprehensive proposal. He stated the County and JDA opted to send out the RFI. He noted the City was open for business and the property was zoned. He reported the City was actively encouraging businesses to submit proposals for the thumb property in order to bring the highest and best use to this site with great jobs that brings prosperity to the area. He did not believe it was fair to change the process while developers were in the middle of their plans. He was of the opinion Director Collins was spot on with her initial assessment. He supported the City staying the course. He recommended the City review the proposals on July 28 and either accept one or consider a new course at that time. Councilmember Fabel stated he was not asking the Planning Commission to come back with an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Rather, he was asking for clarifying language in order to remove a discouragement from what otherwise might be an available use for the property that would be consistent with the overall vision for the TCAAP development and would move the project forward at a more rapid pace. He wanted to see this project start moving. Councilmember Holden questioned why the solicitation wasn't canceled in order to do the process right. She stated this would make sure the process was clear, honest and transparent going forward. MOTION: Councilmember Monson moved and Councilmember Rousseau seconded a motion to direct staff to discuss clarification of the Campus Commercial zoning district and potential additional uses and make a recommendation to the Planning Commission for further discussion by the City Council. Mayor Grant stated there has been some discussion about interpretation of what was already there. He requested comment from staff on what was being meant by this.