CC 09-24-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001 5 quickly and promptly. She referenced a copy of a Star Tribune article of September 4, 2001. She noted the article quoted employers stating there was a housing crunch. She added it quoted Mr. Dan Lindh. She stated the articles explained about matching grants. She noted the article stated Presbyterian Homes was interested in providing housing for their employees. She asked if the city was aware of the 75 housing units in the Roseville and Arden Hills areas referenced in the article. Mr. Lynch stated staff was unaware ofthose plans. He noted Presbyterian Homes did own property in Roseville. He added he did not know their intentions. Ms, Tabor asked if the city would be notified if Presbyterian Homes applied for matching funds. Mr. Lynch responded not necessarily. Mayor Probst stated there was no legal notification by the state to the city. Ms. Tabor stated Presbyterian Homes was getting $ 1.5 million for the Stillwater area. She noted she assumed Presbyterian Homes would want matching money. Mayor Probst stated the discussion about the triangle was for residential uses over commercial units. Mr. Lynch responded they had only discussed six residential units. Ms. Tabor stated she lived two blocks from that comer. She asked when the zoning was changed the last time. Mr. Parrish responded the zoning was changed last year to neighborhood business district Mr. Lynch stated there was an amendment, but it had been zoned neighborhood business for about four or five years. Ms, Tabor asked about a Neighborhood Business Zone. Mr. Lynch responded it allows commercial uses. Ms. Tabor asked about housing. Mr. Lynch responded the amendment last year allowed housing in all neighborhood business districts. Ms. Tabor asked about light retail commercial. Mayor Probst stated it would allow commercial uses that were pedestrian friendly. He noted it allowed uses helpful to the neighborhood. Ms. Tabor asked if it would allow 20 residential units. Mayor Probst responded that the limit of each parcel was site specific. He stated he would not know about this parcel until they receive a formal proposal. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that from a developer's perspective they were always discussing concept options with the planning staff. She noted sometimes they need to float as many as ten before they have one to move forward on. She added staff was not hiding anything. She stated there was no formal proposal in front of the council to discuss. No further public comments were made.