Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—SEPTEMBER 9, 2024 6 <br /> Councilmember Holden stated she was troubled by the presentation and reference to the <br /> proposed development. She commented if the Council agreed to this change, there was no <br /> guarantee that what they proposed would ever be built. <br /> Senior Planner Fransen reported this was the case, noting the change to the parcel, was not <br /> connected to a specific development. <br /> Councilmember Holden indicated the property was rezoned and a 122-unit building was <br /> intended, but this may not be the case. <br /> Senior Planner Fransen commented the applicant has noted they intend to construct a 122 unit <br /> building, but no development land use applications have been submitted to the City for this <br /> property. <br /> Councilmember Holden questioned why the proposal for this property was not brought forward <br /> with the rezoning. <br /> Senior Planner Fransen stated the timing of the applications were determined by the applicant. <br /> She indicated there was a timeframe (three months) for bringing forward a final plat, but <br /> otherwise, the applicant can choose when to bring a preliminary plat or rezoning forward and if <br /> this is tied to a development land use application. <br /> Councilmember Monson asked if typically, a rezoning came in with a preliminary plat. <br /> Interim City Administrator Jagoe reported most commonly the City was used to seeing <br /> preliminary plats and land use development approvals occurring within the same application and <br /> in this instance, the developer has split the processes out. <br /> Mayor Grant commented the land is owned by North Heights Lutheran Church and this request <br /> was being presented by Trident Development. He indicated the land was not yet purchased by <br /> Trident Development and there was no guarantee Trident Development would purchase the land. <br /> He noted the matter before the Council was to consider a preliminary plat and rezoning. <br /> Councilmember Fabel stated in February of 2022 the City Council reviewed a concept plan for <br /> this project and offered approval of the comprehensive plan that would allow the project. He <br /> questioned if the previous approval constrained the ability of this Council to act upon a motion for <br /> an amendment that would comply with the comprehensive plan. <br /> Senior Planner Fransen explained the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance are required to <br /> be in alignment with each other. She reported when a comprehensive plan amendment is made, it <br /> would be the City's responsibility to amend the zoning ordinance accordingly. She indicated the <br /> previous approval does not require a decision as other direction could be provided by the City <br /> Council,based on the application. <br /> Councilmember Holden agreed the comprehensive plan and zoning code does not require the <br /> City Council to approve the rezoning. She noted another alternative available to the City Council <br /> would be to amend the comprehensive plan. She indicated her problem with this request was that <br /> back in 2022 the City Council was told a development was coming forward and this did not <br /> occur. She explained now the Council does not have a development before them to consider. She <br />