12-04-24 PC Minutes-Amended - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – December 4, 2024 11 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. Commissioner Bjorklund requested the developer speak if they would be willing to extending the application time period. Interim City Administrator Jagoe commented the 15.99 timelines are for the rezoning and the final plat and the City has no additional time to review these matters. She indicated the City may have an opportunity to extend the PUD review, but noted the City Council wanted to see the land use application align with the rezoning review. She stated it would be a challenge if only the PUD portion of this project were extended. She reiterated that the rezoning and final plat would have to be reviewed on January 13, 2025. Commissioner Bjorklund stated he would be voting against this project because of its abject nonconformance to the City’s comprehensive plan. Chair Weber agreed.