My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-14-25-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2025
>
04-14-25-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 2:15:37 PM
Creation date
4/15/2025 2:14:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
178
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – MARCH 10, 2025 7 <br /> <br />City Administrator Jagoe reminded this is proposed so the language will need to come back to <br />the Planning Commission and City Council. They expanded on some of the uses. She said today <br />there is no Cottage Courtyard. The small scale or large scale multi-family dwelling are not <br />allowed in R-1 and the consultants are not making any change to that. <br /> <br />Councilmember Monson walked through each use and asked if the proposed types of dwellings <br />are currently allowed in each of the residential districts. <br /> <br />City Administrator Jagoe confirmed that the dwellings are currently allowed by conditional use <br />permit. She pointed out the code doesn’t delineate between Multi-Unit Dwelling (small scale) and <br />Multi-Unit Dwelling (large scale). <br /> <br />Councilmember Monson said aside from the Cottage Courtyard, which is new, and splitting how <br />Multi-Units are defined the consultants aren’t proposing any new uses. They are proposing a <br />change to how they go through the process. <br /> <br />City Administrator Jagoe said the Multi-Unit dwelling is not permitted in any of our residential <br />districts. It is a conditional use permit in R-3 and R-4. They show it permitted, but it is currently a <br />conditional use. The consultant is looking for feedback on if the Council is comfortable with them <br />continuing to look at language where some of our Conditional Uses may be Permitted with <br />Standards. It would remove the need for a Public Hearing. Is there interest in looking at this <br />alternate path to review and approve a project? <br /> <br />Councilmember Weber asked what the density for Cottage Courtyard is. <br /> <br />City Administrator Jagoe didn’t recall off the top of her head. <br /> <br />Councilmember Weber said that is the only question he has to permit it in R-1. It depends on the <br />density. Across the board he supports reducing the number of Conditional Use Permits in the <br />City. It has been a huge sticking point for development of homes and businesses in the City. He <br />thinks eliminating Conditional Use Permits will go a long way in expanding our business <br />enterprise. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant is not aware of the density level of Cottage Courtyard. He believes the cottage is <br />smaller and rather than having an expansive yard, you can essentially add a courtyard. He said <br />there is no density to the Cottage Courtyard. <br /> <br />City Administrator Jagoe said she relates it to the PUD process where you have the <br />concentration of density, smaller lot sizes, concentration of density on one portion of the <br />development. Then there would be open space all reserved on the other side. So instead of having <br />a landscaping and green requirement, you might have that courtyard green and all of the <br />properties contribute to that in another area. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant clarified that this is Arden Hills Proper and doesn’t include TCAAP. <br /> <br />City Administrator Jagoe confirmed. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant isn’t sure there is much place for Cottage Courtyard, since we are pretty much <br />fully developed. He wonders if the consultants know that.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.