01-08-25 PC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – December 4, 2024 11 Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he did not have any objections to the project, except he would like to recommend Condition 25 and that it read: The project will include an affordable housing component, with or without subsidies. Commissioner Erler stated in the past four years the City has added two multi-unit age restricted buildings or 211 market rate units. He indicated this development would raise this number to 330. He explained this was a 10% increase in the total number of residential units in the City. He commented his extra housing was a good thing in the tight housing market. However, he did regret that not one of these units would be available to low income seniors. He stated by comparison, both New Brighton and Roseville have added entire buildings of income adjusted rental units for seniors. His opinion that Arden Hills was part of the problem as the City has not made affordable housing a priority. He commented he could support the minor flexibilities that are being requested, but recommended this project not move forward without affordable units included. Commissioner Collins reported this project does not meet the comprehensive goals when it comes to affordable housing. He believed this was a pretty big miss. He stated he would like to see intentionality from the developer when it comes to affordable housing units, especially because this was a 55+ community. Commissioner Mitchell indicated she would support this project. She believed the variances the developer was requesting were reasonable. She commented further on the process that must be followed by developers in order to pursue State grant funding for affordable housing units. She believed the affordable housing discussion was being brought in late from the Commission for this project. She anticipated the developer would have to start this project over if affordable housing was required. She believed it would benefit the community to have more median priced rental housing available and noted this new housing could lead to more single family homes being on the market. She stated she would be voting to move this project forward. Chair Weber commented this was the Planning Commission’s first look at this project in the past three years. He indicated he has heard about the comprehensive plan and zoning changes, but noted this was the Commission’s first chance to provide input on the City’s affordable housing goals. He believed now was the chance to ask for affordable housing. He was of the opinion this was a must for this project, especially given the flexibilities that were being offered by the City. Interim City Administrator Jagoe explained the comprehensive plan amendment that allowed for the PUD process allows for a density bonus if through the PUD process, other performance criteria are met. She reported the criteria that needed to be met does not require the creation of affordable housing. She stated if the Commission feels the application has not met the criteria for a PUD to grant the flexibility for 13.9 units per acre, the applicant would be held to the 12 units per acre as allowed by city code. She indicated the Planning Commission did not have the option to extend the review period any further because the City was up against the January 13, 2025 15.99 deadline. Commissioner Wicklund reported he was ready to make a motion.