Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 13, 2007 <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the 1-694 Area Improvements. <br />The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />B. Motion to Approveillenv/Table a Request to Transfer Property IS 28-30-23-33-0030 <br />to the City of New Bril!:hton <br /> <br />Mr. Lehnhoff stated Mr. David Canniff made a request to the Council to detach a property from <br />the City of Arden Hills so it could be annexed by the City of New Brighton. The property is <br />zoned R-2, however, the property is not being used for residential purposes. There is a garage on <br />the property. The property is a nonconforming lot in the R-2 zone. <br /> <br />He indicated the property does not appear to have much use in Arden Hills under its current R-2 <br />Zoning designation. Because of the size and shape of the property, it would likely be difficult, <br />though not necessarily impossible, to construct a reasonably sized conforming dwelling. Due to <br />the low value of the property and low taxes payable, the impact on tax collections for Arden Hills <br />would be negligible. He indicated staff does not have a recommendation. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a <br />motion to deny the request to transfer property IS 28-30-23-33-0030 to the <br />City of New Brighton. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead noted he would have moved to approve. He indicated this was a piece of <br />land stuck between a railroad track and the City boundary and he did not believe it was a usable <br />piece ofland. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes agreed and did not understand why this was a part of the City in the <br />first place. She stated it did not make any sense why they would not want to transfer it to the <br />City of New Brighton. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated he understood the owner of the R-2 Zone also owned the <br />industrial zone in New Brighton, which property needed cleaning up. Mr. Lehnhoff noted the <br />property that needed cleaning was not owned by the applicant. He indicated he had spoken with <br />New Brighton about the property that needed cleaning. He noted any development of Mr. <br />Canniffs property would have to meet New Brighton's current standards, which would not <br />include any outdoor storage. <br /> <br />Mr. David Canniff, 2840 27th Avenue South, Minneapolis, stated currently there was a shed <br />and some steel beams on the property. He stated they were ahnost finished clearing it and soon <br />they would have those beams cleaned up also. <br /> <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated her issue was that the City gave up all rights to how this looked <br />and this was a concern for her. She noted this was the same plan that was proposed the last time <br />and she did not want to give up the City's rights. She stated she would rather give a variance. <br />Mr. Canniff stated he had been unable to obtain architectural drawings, but they were proposing <br />a single sloped building facing south with windows at the top of the building. He noted this <br />