CC 11-26-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2001 4 . Councilmember Larson stated he was also opposed to this development for two reasons. He noted he did not feel the applicant made a convincing case that the proposed zoning is superior to the current zoning. He added this did not meet the fundamental standard. He stated the city has a master plan for Bethel College. He noted this was the first time the city saw movement from the college off its campus. He added before this should happen, the Council needed to give a great deal of thought on how Bethel College and the community would interact. He stated the dormitory nature of this building required more parking than was normal for an apartment. He noted the larger parking lot resulted in more surface runoff and more engineering problems in fitting the building to that piece of land. Councilmember Grant stated he would like to see the parcel developed. He noted he was not convinced R-3 was a superior zoning for the parcel. He added he would entertain the suggestion that the case could be presented to the Council. He stated he was concerned about the parking and the size of building. He noted he was not opposed to its development as an R-3 style building. He added he was not enamored with any plans, but believe it could be ironed out with further discussion with staff. Councilmember Rem stated in clarification that the proposed zoning was R-4. . Mr. Loren Kjersten stated he wanted to respond to the reference that Bethel College's standing was beyond the master plan. He noted the permit states Bethel College is prohibited from non-residential growth beyond its boundaries. He added this is not a Bethel College project. He stated a business would have more parking required than for a residential use. He noted this property has been paying a small amount of taxes for many years and no use has been found for it. He added this use is good for this property. He stated that on the table is a "get out of jail free card" for the city's encroachment on this property. He noted he is trying to work with the city to provide an easy solution for everyone. He added from the standpoint of an economic impact he does not see a better use. He stated this use would have less traffic than a business use. He noted they thought they were being creative. Councilmember Larson stated he thought the master plan of the college does not preclude this kind of development. He noted he was not suggesting there was a legal impairment. He added that when Bethel College development starts taking place beyond its boundaries he thinks there should be some discussion about this issue. Mr. Kjersten stated they are willing to put an II-year time limit on it. He noted that was their intent. He added it is not a Bethel College development. He stated it was his development and Bethel College is the tenant. Councilmember Larson stated he could not separate the two. . Mr. Kjersten stated the Bethel College use of the building is relatively short part of the life of the building.