CCP 11-26-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 29,2001 4 Councilmember Larson stated he thought a 95-foot lot and an 85-foot lot split was a better solution. He noted the alternative would make both lots non-conforming. e Mr. Filla stated that in the event the Council was inclined to go that route, they should attach as a condition a requirement that any structure should be located so as to not require additional sideyard setbacks. Mayor Probst stated he would approve it subject to the fact that no one would be able to seek further variances. Councilmember Aplikowski stated often when there was one lot left in the neighborhood, it became a water problem. She noted some people are already concerned about the water on their property. She added they should require the home to be placed so as to not cause a swale effect. Councilmember Grant stated at one point this was a buildable lot and then the city changed its standards. He noted the owner did not change anything, the city did. He added there needed to be a condition that no one could come back to request more variances. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve in Planning Case #01-26, a minor subdivision creating two parcels: Parcel A would be 95 feet wide and Parcel B would be 85 feet wide, subject to the following conditions: 1) No further variances would be granted to Parcel B, 2) Payment of park dedications fees, 3) Patio on Parcel A shall conform to the setback requirements, and 4) Grading and Drainage plan approval needed prior to building permit approval. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). e 3. Case # 01-22, Beacon Construction, County Road E-2 and Cleveland, Rezoning, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Master and Final Planned Unit Development Mr. Parrish explained this was a series of actions oriented toward approval of a 30-unit apartment building. He stated there was a request for a rezoning from Neighborhood Business District to RA. He noted there would be a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He added there might be a concern with the building height depending on how it was measured. Councilmember Grant asked about the additional traffic. Mr. Parrish responded there was not a formal traffic study. He stated the Applicant would have a better indication of any impact. He noted there would be bus service between Bethel College and the apartment to alleviate some of the traffic. He added traffic from this site would be an offset since it was spread out more than in a traditional development. Mr. Bruce Kunkle, of Bethel College, stated the school currently runs a shuttle from a New Brighton housing development, which runs every 20 minutes. He noted this stop would complete the loop. He added there was a very high student participation rate. e