10-14-24-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

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