My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-28-25-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2025
>
04-28-25-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2025 8:56:39 AM
Creation date
5/13/2025 8:56:36 AM
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.
/
16
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—APRIL 28, 2025 6 <br /> City Council with approval from the Architectural and Environmental Committee of the Hunters <br /> Park Homeowners Association. The proposed addition was constructed before the Applicant <br /> became the owner of the Subject Property. <br /> City Administrator Jagoe reviewed the site data and plan evaluation in further detail with the <br /> Council. Staff requested the Council determine if a variance request for flexibility on the structure <br /> coverage should be approved. The submitted survey shows the location of the proposed addition. <br /> The evaluation of the proposal should be based on the District Provisions in Section 1320 and the <br /> Requirements for a Variance in Section 1355.04, Subd. 4. In addition, a Conditional Use Permit <br /> is required for Class 11 Accessory Home Occupations. A home occupation is allowed in <br /> residential zoning districts as an accessory use, but it becomes a Class 11 Home Occupation when <br /> there are patrons visiting the premises. City Code Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of the Arden Hills <br /> Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a Conditional Use Permit. The City Council should <br /> consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare <br /> of the owners and occupants of the surrounding land and the community, in general, including but <br /> not limited to the following factors: <br /> 1. Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions; <br /> 2. Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and other <br /> nuisance characteristics; <br /> 3. Drainage; <br /> 4. Population density; <br /> 5. Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land; <br /> 6. Adjoining land values; <br /> 7. Park dedications where applicable; <br /> 8. Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose and intent <br /> of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. <br /> City Administrator Jagoe reviewed the plan evaluation in further detail with the Council and <br /> requested the Council hold a public hearing. <br /> Councilmember Monson asked if home occupation requirements was being reviewed by the <br /> City's consultants. <br /> City Administrator Jagoe stated this has not been addressed, but staff could pass along feedback <br /> to the consultant to see if there are any review comments as part of their analysis. <br /> Councilmember Monson supported the City not having to review CUP's for in-home piano <br /> lesson businesses. She explained she would be supporting both the variance and the CUP. <br /> Councilmember Holden indicated she supported the City having some regulations in place when <br /> it comes to home occupations and suggested the allowed uses be listed within City Code. <br /> Councilmember Weber stated he agreed with both points of view and recommended the Council <br /> further discuss which uses are allowed and which are not for home occupations at a future <br /> worksession meeting. He commented on the number of people who spoke on behalf of the <br /> applicant at the Planning Commission meeting and noted he would be supporting the proposed <br /> requests. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.