HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-05-25 PC packetChair:
Joshua Collins
It
(2027)
-
Commissioners:
--A EN HILLS
Brad Bjorklund
(2025)
Planning Commission
Steve Erler (2026)
February 5, 2025
Ben Lindau (2026)
6:30 p.m.
Patrick Burlingame
City Hall
(2027)
Katie Stromberg-
Alternate (2026)
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant -Alternate
Council Liaison:
Councilmember
Kurt Weber
City Vision
Address:
1245 W Highway 96
Arden Hills MN 55112
Phone:
651-792-7800
Website :
www.cityofardenhiIIs.org
Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting,
strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained
infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long-standing tradition as a desirable
City in which to live, work, and play.
Members of the public may attend a meeting in -person at City Hall or they may
view the meeting remotely on the City's website using the below link. Meetings are
also broadcast on Cable Channel 16 for those that live in Arden Hills.
https://cityofardenhills.org/320/Watch-City-Meetings
Agenda
CALL TO ORDER
1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
2. APPROVAL OF VICE -CHAIR
Documents:
MEMO.PDF
3. APPROVAL OF 2025 MEETING CALENDAR
Documents:
MEMO.PDF
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4.A. Draft 01-08-25 PC Minutes
Documents:
DRAFT 01-08-25 PC MINUTES.PDF
5. PLANNING CASES
6. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
6.A. Zoning And Subdivision Ordinance Update Discussion
HKGI
Documents:
MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT 1 - AH LOT REQUIREMENTS.PDF
ATTACHMENT 2 - AH SITE STANDARDS.PDF
7. COMMENTS AND REPORTS
7.A. Report From The City Council
7.B. Planning Commission Comments
8. ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURN
A quorum of the City Council may be
present at this meeting.
PC Agenda Item —2
'It
--ii�EN! HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 5, 2025
TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners
FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Interim City Administrator
SUBJECT: Appointment of Vice Chair
Requested Action
On January 13th, the City Council appointed Commissioner Collins as the Chair of the Planning
Commission for 2025. City code delegates the responsibility for the appointment of a Vice Chair
to the respective Committee or Commission (ordinance language below). The Planning
Commission shall discuss and appoint a Vice Chair for 2025.
Section 220.01, Subd. 10 states " Unless otherwise specifically provided, the City Council shall
annually appoint one (1) Member to serve as Chair of each Board, Committee, Commission or
other appointed body. The Chair shall be responsible for meeting agendas, presiding at meetings,
minutes of meetings, and reports and recommendations to the City Council. Subcommittees of the
Board, Committee, Commission or other appointed body may be formed, from time to time, based
upon the needs of the City. The Board, Committee, Commission or other appointed body may
appoint a Member to serve as Vice -Chair."
Page 1 of 1
PC Agenda Item — 3
'It
--ii�EN! HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 5, 2025
TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners
FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Interim City Administrator
SUBJECT: 2025 Meeting Calendar
Requested Action
The Planning Commission regularly meets on the first Wednesday of the month following the first
Monday of the month at 6:30 PM. Planning staff has provided below the 2025 calendar of meeting
dates based on this schedule. The Planning Commission should discuss and adopt the 2025
calendar.
2025 Meeting Dates
January 8th
February 5th
March 5th
April 9th
May 7th
June 4th
jUly 9th
August 6th
September 3rd
October 81h
November 51h
December 3rd
Page 1 of 1
DRAFT
,-ARQEN HILLS
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2025
6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Vice Chair Collins called to order the regular Planning
Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present were: Commissioners Brad Bjorklund, Joshua Collins, Stephen Erler, Ben Lindau, and
Katie Stromberg.
Absent: None.
Also present were: Interim City Administrator Jessica Jagoe, Consultant Planner TJ Hofer and
Councilmember Emily Rousseau.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA — JANUARY 8, 2025
Commissioner Erler moved, seconded by Commissioner Bjorklund, to approve the
January 8, 2025, agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
December 4, 2024 — Planning Commission Regular Meeting
Commissioner Bjorklund requested changes to the minutes. He stated that his comment on Page
12 should read: The project does not conform to the policies and goals of Section 6 and 7 of the
City's Comprehensive Plan. He reported in the middle of Page 12, his comment should read: he
spoke with the developer about the need for moderate income housing, as well. He stated a
second sentence be added to read: and further stated that he would swear on an affidavit
affirming the developer knew of the City's desire for low income housing prior to the Planning
Commission meeting.
Commissioner Bjorklund discussed an untruth in the minutes on Page 8 noting Mr. Fink
commented that this was the first time this has come up, and reiterated that he had spoken to the
developer prior to the meeting. He addressed a comment within the minutes on Page 13, noting
Mr. Fink explained he did not receive any push back from the neighbors or the City Council on
the concept. He reported Mr. Fink left out the fact that the Planning Commission and himself
talked to him personally prior to the meeting that low income housing was important to the City.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 2025 2
Interim City Administrator Jagoe stated she understood Commissioner Bjorklund's concerns
regarding Mr. Fink's comments, but noted the minutes were to reflect what happened at the
meeting.
Commissioner Biorklund moved, seconded by Commissioner Erler, to approve the
December 4, 2024, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as amended. The motion carried
unanimously 3-0-2 (Commissioners Lindau and Stromberg abstained).
PLANNING CASES
A. Planning Case 24-020; 4200 Round Lake Road — Planned Unit Development
Amendment and Site Plan Review — Public Hearing
Consultant Planner Hofer stated Scannell Properties previously submitted a land use
application for a Master Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review,
and Preliminary/Final Plat to develop the existing approximately 250,000 square foot office and
warehouse building on the property at 4200 Round Lake Road. This application was approved,
with conditions, with Resolution 2020- 045 on October 12, 2020. It was stated in the approvals
that a separate sign permit would be required for all proposed signage and that all proposed
signage shall meet the requirements of Sign District 6. Delkor Systems, Inc. previously
submitted a land use application for a Planned Unit Development Amendment to allow
flexibility from the City Code on wall signage. This application was approved, with conditions,
with Planning Case 22-014 on August 3, 2022, by the City Council.
Consultant Planner Hofer reported the Subject Property is currently owned by Altus
Properties, LLC., and the building is currently occupied by Delkor Systems, Inc. and Colder
Products Company (CPC). The PUD Development Agreement for Gateway Interstate ("PUD
Development Agreement") was approved on April 16, 2021. The Applicant is now asking to
amend the PUD agreement to allow for an increase in the amount of sign area permitted and
allow for flexibility of commercial text on the sign faces.
Consultant Planner Hofer reviewed the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for
review:
Planned Unit Development Amendment Findings:
1. The Applicant submitted an application for a Planned Unit Development Amendment and
Site Plan Review.
2. The Subject Property is located within the GB — Gateway Business and is designated for
Limited Industrial & Office uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
3. The Subject Property is approximately 22 acres and is owned by Altus Properties, LLC.
4. Adjustments to the requirements and standards for the height, number, type, lighting,
area, and/or location of a sign or signs established by Chapter 12 — Sign Code may be
approved with a Site Plan Review or a Planned Unit Development process as described
for in Section 1320 and 1355 of the Zoning Code.
5. New building construction or site modification identified requires the submittal of a Site
Plan Review application prior to construction.
6. The Planned Unit Development generally conforms to the requirements of the City
Zoning Code and design standards.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 2025 3
7. Resolution 2020-045 approved a Planned Unit Development for the Subject Property
with flexibility for the following areas: district provisions, lot area, lot dimensions,
parking setbacks, building height, minimum caliper inches, aesthetics, perennials and
shrubberies.
8. A Planned Unit Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on February
8, 2021.
9. A Planned Unit Development Amendment related to signage was approved by the
Planning Commission on August 3, 2022.
10. Where the plan is not in conformance with the City Code, the Applicant has requested
flexibility.
11. Flexibility through the PUD process has been requested in the following areas: auxiliary
signage.
12. The proposed signage plan will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of
the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land use.
13. A public hearing for a Planned Unit Development Amendment is required before the
request can be brought before the City Council.
Consultant Planner Hofer stated staff recommends approval of Planning Case 24-020 for a
Planned Unit Development Amendment and Site Plan Review for auxiliary signage at 4200
Round Lake Road, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the
conditions in the January 8, 2025, Report to the Planning Commission:
1. All conditions of the original Preliminary/Final Plat, Planned Unit Development,
Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan Review and their corresponding resolutions shall
remain in full force and effect.
2. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans as amended by the
conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the
Community Development Director, shall require review and approval by the Planning
Commission and City Council.
3. A violation of any condition set forth in the permit shall be a violation of this Code and
shall be cause for revocation of the permit.
4. A separate sign permit shall be required for all proposed signs.
5. The final location of auxiliary signs shall be subject to the approval of the PW
Director/City Engineer and shall comply with comments as provided within the
application review.
6. The proposed signs shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code.
Consultant Planner Hofer reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this
matter:
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted
3. Recommend Denial
4. Table
Chair Weber opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Vice Chair Collins stated Appendix A allows for two signs per side. He asked if the appendix
considered sign square footage.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — January 8, 2025 4
Consultant Planner Hofer reported Chapter 12Sign Code looks at total square footage but
Appendix A does not evaluate the size of the sign.
Commissioner Erler requested comment from the applicant as to why they were requesting
additional signage.
Rick Feraro, Spectrum Sign Systems, introduced himself to the Commission. He stated due to
the massive site he was seeking a sign change. He explained he had a PUD approved that would
allow him to have three signs. He reported since CPC and Delkor have occupied the building
with multiple entrances, there are now various commercial deliveries, customers and employees
coming to the site. He stated the sign request would assist visitors and deliveries going to the
correct destination in the most efficient and safe manner possible.
Vice Chair Collins opened the public hearing at 6:59 p.m.
Vice Chair Collins invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make
comment.
There being no additional comment Vice Chair Collins closed the public hearing at 6:59 p.m.
Commissioner Stromberg stated she supported the proposed request.
Commissioner Lindau indicated he supported the request as well.
Commissioner Erler moved and Commissioner Bjorklund seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Planning Case 24-020 for a Planned Unit Development
Amendment and Site Plan Review for auxiliary signage at 4200 Round Lake Road based
on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the
January 8, 2025, report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried unanimously (5-
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
None.
REPORTS
A. Report from the City Council
Councilmember Rousseau provided the Commission with an update from the City Council. She
noted this would be her last meeting as the Council liaison, noting newly elected Councilmember
Weber would be serving as the liaison for 2025.
B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests
Commissioner Bjorklund requested an update from staff regarding the North Heights housing
development.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 2025 5
Interim City Administrator Jagoe reported the developer would be coming before the City
Council at the January 13 meeting and a supplemental narrative was included in their packet of
materials.
A n-InI TR N
Vice Chair Collins moved, seconded by Commissioner Biorklund, to adjourn the January
8, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting at 7:07 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
PC Agenda Item - 6A
I
1*
HKG*1
Planning Landscape Architecture I Urban Design
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
TO: City of Arden Hills Planning Commission
FROM: Jason Zimmerman and Kendra Ellner, Consulting Planners
DATE: January 30, 2025
SUBJECT: Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions— Work Session #1
MEETING DATE: February 5, 2025
OVERVIEW
HKGi was selected by the City of Arden Hills to complete an update to the existing Zoning and
Subdivision ordinances. The Planning Commission, as the body most involved with the application of
the code, will help conduct a technical review of the proposed changes and provide recommendations
to the City Council. The first work session will cover some of the foundational elements upon which the
rest of the ordinances will be built — base zoning districts, residential uses, and the required lot and site
standards.
BACKGROUND
The current zoning and subdivision ordinances were adopted in 1993 but have been amended several
times since — occasionally resulting in inconsistencies and poor formatting. In addition, procedures and
some content need to be updated to reflect modern administration and new tools and technologies.
HKGi has conducted a full evaluation of the current code and will be working throughout 2025 to meet
with the Planning Commission and City Council in order to revise the organization and contents of the
zoning and subdivision chapters.
The project has been broken down into four phases:
Phase 1— Project Kick Off and Understanding [COMPLETE]
Phase 2 — Diagnose the Current Ordinances and Frame Approach [COMPLETE]
Phase 3 — Prepare Draft Codes
Work Session #1— Zoning Districts and Uses [WE ARE HERE]
Work Session #2 — General Development Standards and Provisions
Work Session #3 — Development Procedures and Subdivision Regulations
Phase 4 — Final Ordinance Adoption and Implementation
HKGi prepared a document that summarizes the state of the current ordinances and proposes changes
to improve the structure and content —the Zoning and Subdivision Code Diagnosis Report. This
document was shared by City staff.
Each work session with the Planning Commission will be focused on a handful of topics. The City
Council will be briefed after each meeting on the discussion and recommendations of the Planning
HKGi
800 Washington Ave N Suite 103, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 — www.hkgi.com
Planning Commission Meeting — Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions — Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
Commission. Targeted stakeholder groups will be involved throughout the year as needed to provide
input on various topics. Consideration and adoption of the new code is anticipated for late fall of 2025.
WORK SESSION TOPICS
There are five broad topics that will be discussed at the first work session:
• Base Zoning Districts
• District Purpose Statements
• Housing Types
• Lot and Site Standards
• Accessory Dwelling Units
Base Zoning Districts
Arden Hills currently has 17 different base zoning districts. This number is high compared to the typical
number of districts in peer communities in the Twin Cities. There are four residential districts, which is
a typical number. There are six commercial/business districts; three to four is a more common number.
Unless there is a good reason to keep each district, and a clear difference between each of them, the
code would benefit from reducing the number of districts overall — and the number of business
districts specifically.
At the beginning of the code rewrite process, there were two zoning districts in the city that each had
only one site so designated — B-1 and 1-2. Since that time, the single property zoned B-1 has been
rezoned. Given the large number of zoning districts, and the infrequency with which these two
categories have been used, HKGi is recommending they both be eliminated. The single site zoned 1-2,
which is the lumberyard on Hwy 10, could be rezoned to 1-1. Any concerns about outdoor storage of
materials at this location could be addressed as those standards are updated in the code generally.
Originally, there was thought of combining the B-3 and B-4 zoning districts into one new district as
these two seems to serve similar purposes, have a small number of parcels zoned within each, and the
two districts sit adjacent to each other. However, with the recent decision by the City Council to only
allow cannabis retail sales in the B-4 district, it is best to keep these two districts separate.
Currently, the B-3 district is called the Service Business District, even though the uses that are currently
there are primarily focused on retail. The B-4 district, on the other hand, is called the Retail Business
District but has little to no retail and instead contains a number of service businesses such as print
shops, contracting services, supply and distribution companies, and indoor recreation. Assuming the
preference of the City is to continue to encourage these uses in their current configuration, HKGi is
recommending name changes to these districts to make it clearer how they are intended to be used.
Since the B-3 district provides retail options along a major arterial, it is recommended it be renamed
the Corridor Business district. The B-4 district functions as a typical business park in the way it
accommodates multiple businesses in multi -tenant buildings with a focus on providing services or
other non -retail operations. It is recommended to be renamed the Business Park district.
FA
Planning Commission Meeting —Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions — Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
Comparison of Existing and Proposed Districts
Current Districts
Proposed Districts
Single Family Residential
R-1
Suburban Residential 1
R-1
Single Family and Two Family Residential
R-2
Suburban Residential 2
R-2
Townhouse and Low Density Multiple
Dwelling
R-3
Mixed Residential
R-3
Multiple Dwelling
R-4
Attached Residential
R-4
Neighborhood Business
NB
Neighborhood Business
NB
Limited Business
B-1
---
---
General Business
B-2
Mixed Use
MU
Service Business
B-3
Corridor Business
CB
Retail Center
B-4
Business Park
BP
Gateway Business
GB
Gateway Business
GB
Civic Center
CC
Civic Center
CC
Limited Industrial
1-1
Limited Industrial
1-1
General Industrial
1-2
---
---
I-FLEX
I -FLEX
I -FLEX
I -FLEX
Parks and Open Space
POS
Parks and Open Space
POS
Conservation
CD
Conservation
CD
Institutional
INST
Institutional
INST
District Purpose Statements
Within the zoning chapter, each district includes a statement of purpose which helps describe what
sorts of uses should be allowed and how it fits into the overall landscape of the city. Based on the
changes recommended by HKGi (the elimination of two of the lesser -used districts), as well as the
renaming of two or more of the base districts, the following purpose statements are being proposed.
Generally, the changes incorporate these four principles:
1. Move away from residential districts labeled with housing types.
2. Clarify the purposes of the B-3 and B-4 districts and rename to better align with the existing and
desired uses.
3. Revisit the Civic Center District to ensure the zoning matches the City's vision.
4. Overall, keep the focus on the purpose of the districts and the sorts of uses allowed or
characteristics envisioned — remove references to how standards will be applied or how the
districts will function.
R-1: Suburban Residential 1
The purpose of the Suburban Residential 1 District (R-1) is to provide areas for single -unit and two -unit
dwellings, as well as for senior housing, or for institutional uses such as schools or places of worship in
settings that are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
VA
Planning Commission Meeting —Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions — Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
R-2: Suburban Residential 2
The purpose of the Suburban Residential 2 District (R-2) is to provide areas for a mixture of single -unit
and two -unit dwellings, as well as for senior housing, or for institutional uses such as schools or places
of worship in settings that are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
R-3: Mixed Residential
The purpose of the Mixed Residential District (R-3) is to provide areas for single -unit and two -unit
dwellings; attached housing, including twinhomes, townhomes, small-scale multifamily buildings; and
senior housing. Schools and places of worship may be permitted in settings that are compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood.
R-4: Attached Residential
The purpose of the Attached Residential District (R-4) is to provide areas for attached housing,
including multifamily buildings and senior housing. Schools and places of worship may be permitted in
settings that are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
MU: Mixed Use
The purpose of the Mixed Use District (MU) is to serve as a mixed use area in which to live, work, or
recreate within a compact and architecturally enhanced setting. This district supports a wide range of
compatible residential, retail, service, office, and institutional uses. Site standards encourage
pedestrians and bicyclists and the creation of places for people to gather and socialize.
NB: Neighborhood Business
The purpose of the Neighborhood Business District (NB) is to provide areas for limited and compatible
retail, service, and office uses, along with small-scale mixed use buildings that may include dwelling
units. Development should encourage pedestrian, bicycle, and public transportation access.
L13: Lortiuor business
The purpose of the Corridor Business District (CB) is to accommodate the transactions of a broad range
of goods and services to meet the needs of the surrounding community, as well as the needs of passing
motorists due to proximity to arterial streets or highways.
BP: Business Par
The purpose of the Business Park District (BP) is to provide a centralized location for multiple -
occupancy buildings that are able to serve a wide variety of uses, including supply and distribution,
printing, contracting offices, and indoor sports and fitness.
GB- GSitPWAV RucinPcc
The purpose of the Gateway Business District (GB) is to establish areas for unified, large-scale
development of light industrial, office, warehouse, and research uses in close proximity to freeways.
4
Planning Commission Meeting — Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions — Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
I-1: Limited Industrial
The purpose of the Limited Industrial District (1-1), is to provide areas where industrial uses may locate
in order to present the fewest impacts to adjacent land uses.
The purpose of the I -FLEX District is to allow for a variety of office, service, manufacturing, and other
compatible uses that serve local and regional needs. Development should foster employment and
complement the surrounding uses in terms of performance, character, quality, and appearance.
:C: Civic Center
The purpose of the Civic Center District (CC) is to accommodate intergovernmental facilities and uses
that provide important public services to the community. Development should be compatible with
adjacent uses and located on or in proximity to an arterial.
INST: Institutional
The purpose of the Institutional District (INST) is to establish areas for educational, residential, athletic,
or recreational facilities to serve students on the campus of a post -secondary education institution.
POS: Parks and Open Space
The purpose of the Parks and Open Space District (POS) is to provide areas for publicly owned lands
that have recognized outdoor recreational or open space resources, to support community health
through the provision of active and passive outdoor recreational opportunities, to promote natural and
ecological stewardship, and to conserve vital environmental resources.
CD: Conservation
The purpose of the Conservation District (CD) is to provide a "holding" zone for federally owned lands
on the Arden Hills Army Training Site to ensure that future development is staged, maintains a
sustainable level of public expenditures for utilities and services, and protects those areas generally
determined to be unsuitable for development due to the presence of wetlands, floodplains, steep
slopes, certain drainage and soil conditions, and critical wildlife habitat.
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
• Is there a clear vision for each of the City's base zoning districts?
• Do the names of each of the districts align with their purpose and how they are intended to be
used?
Expanding Access to Housing
The need and desire to expand access to housing, particularly addressing missing middle housing, was
emphasized in the survey responses from the City Council and Planning Commission, the October 2024
joint meeting, and HKGi's diagnostic review of the code. Prioritizing this topic early in the code update
5
Planning Commission Meeting — Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions — Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
process establishes a foundation that informs other sections of the code, such as required lot and site
standards.
Currently, the use table in the existing code is restrictive in terms of the approval process, permitting
only detached single-family homes by right (see the existing use table below). Other housing types
require a conditional use permit (CUP) or must go through a Planned Unit Development (PUD) process,
creating additional barriers such as increasing the time and cost for development. Additionally, the
definitions of existing housing types are unclear. For example, multiple family dwellings are defined as
"containing three or more attached units," but there is no distinction between the various types of
multiple family dwellings (e.g., townhomes, fourplexes, small scale or large-scale apartments). The
broad categories make it unclear which housing products would be acceptable in Arden Hills.
Images of various precedent housing types will be shown during the work session.
To clarify and simplify the housing options and align them with the city's intended character, HKGi will
explore this topic further and discuss the City's comfort with various levels of regulation. The existing
use table below illustrates the existing options for housing in each district, along with the current type
of approval. The proposed use table shows HKGi's suggestion for a more detailed breakdown of
housing types. An exercise during the meeting will help fill-in the types of approval in each district.
Based on the discussions, the proposed use table will be refined and allow new standards to be
incorporated into the updated zoning code. This will lead to right -sizing the lot and site standards for
each district to accommodate these housing options.
This approach will not significantly alter existing neighborhoods but will provide more flexible
opportunities for redevelopment and also help meet the goal of increasing housing options. This, in
turn, will influence affordability, community character, density, and other aspects of the zoning code.
Existing Use Table
Use
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
Dwelling: single-family detached
P
P
P
P
Dwelling: single-family attached
C
C
PUD
PUD
Dwelling: two-family
C
C
PUD
PUD
Dwelling: multiple family
C
C
Table Legend:
P = Permitted Use
C = Conditional Use
PUD = Permitted only through a Planned Unit Development
Blank = Prohibited
6
Planning Commission Meeting — Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions — Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
Proposed Use Table
Use
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
Single -unit Dwelling
Duplex
Twinhome
Cottage Courtyard
Townhome/Rowhouse
Multi -unit Dwelling (small scale)
Multi -unit Dwelling (large scale)
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
• What housing types are appropriate for each of the residential zoning districts in Arden Hills?
• What type of approval should be required for each?
Lot and Site Standards
Currently, most lot and site standards are contained within one large chart. The existing formatting
lacks hierarchy, includes requirements that are redundant or may not be needed, and may feel
overwhelming or confusing in terms of the amount of information provided. In addition, modified
standards are listed elsewhere in the code, either within text that addresses specific districts or related
to other circumstances such as land within the Shoreland Overlay.
HKGi has a number of recommendations related to this section of code for residential uses:
1. Split the District Requirement Chart into at least two separate tables (Lot Requirements and
Site Standards)
2. Consider eliminating the "Minimum Lot Depth" standard
3. Eliminate Floor Area Ratio (FAR) as a standard
4. Reduce "Minimum Corner Side Yard Setbacks" for R-1, R-2, and R-3 districts
5. Simplify setbacks from some other uses and convert to table footnotes: building setbacks from
State Highways or County Roads, shoreland setbacks, building setbacks from abutting
residential districts
6. Remove accessory structure setbacks from the table and address separately
7. Eliminate the "Maximum Dwelling Unit Density per Net Acre" standard
Draft tables for lot requirements and site standards are included with this memo as a starting point for
discussion, but may be revised as the districts and uses covered above are updated.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Floor Area Ratio is a measure of the total floor area of a building compared to the total area of the lot.
It is generally a way of controlling the mass or volume of a building, but does not regulate where on
the lot the building may be located or how tall it can be.
7
Planning Commission Meeting —Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions — Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
An FAR of 1 could be represented in a few different ways. It could be a one story building that covers
the entire lot (a 1:1 ratio), a two story building that covers half the lot (a 2:1/2 ratio which equals 1),
etc. An FAR of 2 means there is twice as much floor area as lot area — a two story building that covers
the entire lot is an example of this ratio. See the Met Council's example graphic below:
FAR: 1
1 story covers 2 stones cover 4 stones cover
whole rot 112 of the rot 114 of the lol
ff1�4
a' .
2 stares cover 4 stones cover 8 stones cover
whole tot 112 of the tot 114 of the tot
Because there is a great deal of variability between building shape and size with the same FAR,
regulating the form may be better served by using a combination of three other standards already in
the zoning code: setbacks, height, and lot coverage.
Corner Side Yard Setbacks
Staff and the City Council have indicated a desire to examine the current standard for corner side yard
setbacks in residential districts, due to the number of variances that have been requested (and
granted) in recent years.
Corner lots have two yards that face streets. In Arden Hills, the shorter of the two street lot lines is
determined to be the front yard, while the longer of the two street lines is determined to be the corner
side yard. For all residential districts, the setback requirement for the corner side yard currently
matches that of the front yard at 40 feet. Variance requests to reduce the corner side yard setback
generally come as property owners look to expand their homes into this area.
An examination of a number of other communities in the metro area shows that most of those
researched have a reduced corner yard setback in relation to the front yard — though this is not the
case for three communities immediately adjacent to Arden Hills. The reduced corner side yard is
anywhere from 1/3 to 2/3 the size of the front yard setback, as shown in the table below:
8
Planning Commission Meeting —Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions — Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
Setbacks Requirements in Other Metro Cities
[City
Front Yard Setback (ft)
Corner Side Yard Setback (ft)
Crystal
30
10
Columbia Heights
25
12
Edina
30
15
Golden Valley
35
May not reduce the remaining building
envelope to less than 27 feet in width
Little Canada
30
20
Minneapolis
20
8
Richfield
30
12
Robbinsdale
30
15, or 5 for 40 foot wide lots
Roseville
30
10
St. Louis Park
25
15, or 9 for lots less than 60 feet wide
Vadnais Heights
30
20
Mounds View
30
130
New Brighton
30
30
Shoreview
25
25
Arden Hills
40
40
The main reason to keep the corner side yard setback as large as the front yard setback is to maintain a
wide viewshed from the public right-of-way. A primary reason to reduce the corner side yard setback is
the argument from homeowners that this yard feels and functions as a side yard (not a front yard) and
that by keeping it at 40 feet, the area on the lot in which they can build is limited compared to other
lots on the block where the interior side yard setback may be as little as 5 feet. A secondary reason is
that repeated variances to request a reduction of this requirement cost property owners and the City
time and money.
HKGi believes it in the interest of the city to reduce the corner side yard setback to 20 feet for single -
unit dwellings, duplexes, and twinhomes in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 zoning districts. Looking at the past
four variance requests that were made, two would have been allowed by right if this standard had
been in place, while the remaining two requests were large enough they would still have needed to
come to the City for consideration.
E
Planning Commission Meeting —Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions —Work Session #1—February 5, 2025
Recent Variance Requests
Zoning
Corner Side Yard
Required (ft)
Corner Side Yard
Existing (ft)
Corner Side Yard
Variance Approved (ft)
R-1
40
40.2
28.2
R-1
40
35.33
23.33
R-2
40
1.4
5.8
R-1
40
20
7.82
Maximum Dwelling Unit Density per Net Acre
Residential densities are currently addressed in multiple places. The first is as part of the
Comprehensive Plan — the Met Council requires metro communities to establish densities for all land
uses as part of the future land use plan. Second, each of the residential zoning districts states the
target residential density in its purpose statement. Third, the District Requirement Chart includes a
standard for maximum density for all districts that allow residential uses. Finally, the minimum lot area
per dwelling unit provides the same information in a slightly different form. The site standard chart can
be simplified and made easier to use by reducing duplicative requirements.
The residential portions of the two draft tables for Lot Requirements and Site Standards are included
as attachments to this memo.
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
• Are there questions or concerns around any of the recommended lot and site standard
changes?
Accessory Dwelling Units
In addition to the previous topic around housing types, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) offer a smaller -
scale solution. ADUs are secondary dwellings on the same lot as a principal dwelling, with their own
entrance, kitchen, living area, and bathroom. They are also known as in-law suites, granny flats, or
carriage houses. Cities often consider ADUs for several reasons:
• They provide housing in closer proximity for family members, students, the elderly, in -home
health care providers, the disabled, and others.
• Homeowners who create ADUs may benefit from added income and assistance with
property maintenance.
• They typically offer a lower cost of living, meeting the needs of existing and future residents
within established neighborhoods while respecting architectural character and existing
infrastructure.
10
Planning Commission Meeting —Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions —Work Session #1— February 5, 2025
• They provide a unique housing option for those whom want to downsize, but desire to stay
within their existing neighborhood.
Cities exploring ADUs often consider regulations on size, utilities, parking, occupancy, design, setbacks
and construction. ADU construction can be detached, attached, or conversion/internal, demonstrated
in the graphic below. HKGi is addressing this topic because it was highlighted as an area of interest to
explore alongside expanding access to additional housing through the use table. The City Council has
indicated it is an option they may explore in the future, but at this point the Planning Commission is
not being asked to delve into the potential regulation. As the new code is drafted a placeholder will be
carved out to allow ADUs to be added down the road following further discussions and more robust
conversations and direction from the Council.
CONVERTED GARAGE
DETACHED ADU
illITIl/ /�� ATTACHED ADU
mil%
BASEMENT CONVERSION
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
• What are the general reactions to the idea of ADUs in Arden Hills?
NEXT STEPS
Following Work Session #1, HKGi will draft revisions to the zoning code text and review the proposed
changes with staff. A summary of the session will be forwarded to the City Council. Work Session #2
will focus on completing the updated use table (with nonresidential uses) and on specific development
standards such as parking, landscaping, fencing, outdoor lighting, and signage.
ATTACHMENTS
• DRAFT Lot Requirement Table
• DRAFT Site Standard Table
11
it
W
Q ++
m r_
O
00
O
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
0000
0
0
0
Q
0
cc
0
cc
0
0
0��
l
m
l
�
�
l
o�
Rt
l
J •�
a
o
o
n
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
LiI
o
M
o0
oo
t.6
M
r1
N
ri
N
Ln
Lf1
oo
oo
;
C �
L
++
w
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
O
O
O
Ln
O
O
O
O
O
Ln
O
CD
C
aJ
m
C)
00
a)
00
00
n
00
00
00
0
0
0
00
O
O
0
0
0
00
0
0
0
CC
C
f6
a1
i
Q
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
++
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
J
Cr
O
o
O
C
C
Ln
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Ln
O
O
O
O
O
N
't
c-I
r-I
r-I
r-I
ri
m
Ln
m
r-I
.--I
r-I
fM
.---I
Ln
Ln
M
C
Ul
Ul
N
N
V)
0
0
N
N
N
N
-0
-0
'a
'a
O
d.0
h0
O
OD
O
hD
—
a1
—
a1
—
L
c
a1
a1
t
c
L
c
L
_C
0
L
aj
Q
L
av
Q
O
p
L
v
p
L
v
L
�
L
a�
+'
n
n
}
U
E
+�
n
+�
n
E
+�
n
E
+�
n
o
ai
au
o
aj
a,
0
t
3
v
aj
o
t
0
0
t
0
v
t
v
v
c}}
c}
ai
c}
ao
a
.�
O
ao
a
.�
O
ao
a
O75
0
3
o
Q
375
O
o
�
o
v
o
c
o
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
txo v
co
o
oc
oc
CL
0
z
N
r4
7
N
rn
O
O
rn
m
c-I
c
O
U
aJ
N
c
O
L
Q
a)
(O
V
.-
(O
L
O
L
O
0
CIO
CIO
4-
0
Q
w
a-J
E
i
U
fB
a
4-
El
Cu M
a a)
C U
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
Q
O[V
C
l0
lD
lD
lD
lD
ro
r J
m
J
O u L
J i ++
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
L r)
Ln
L r)
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
CU
i
c'V
N
fV
N
N
m
U L�iL
E
t
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
O
Ln
x
cn
rn
rn
m
m
Ln
rn
La
2
i
a
cry
O
m
a �
a
aJ
Ln
O�
O
O
O
O
CV
O
v
�O
�O
in
i
U
)
aJ
R
(n
N
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
O
N
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
0
Ln
E
C
c3
C_
}
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
L
m
m
m
m
m
N
N
m
a)
E
m
}
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
Ln
fV
O
L
Li-
V)
v
v
a)
v
a)
Q)
Q)
Q)
Q)
7
-6
7
7
-O
7
-O
7
-O
7
-O
O
w
w
O
w
O
M
3
4-1
3
4-14
3
L
-
C
—
a)
C
—
a)
4
L
C
—
a)
�--�
E
t
C
—
a)
4-1
E
3
3
3
3
a)
v
a\i
o
v
o
v
o
W
o
Q)
3
x
O
L
a)
7
x
O
L
a)
E
7
x
a)
O
L
a1
L
a1
O
L
a)
x
O
L
a i
i
i
i
bn
L
i
bA
Q
O
bA
Q
O
bA
O
3
O
O
3
O
O_
3
O
H
H
7
3
O
O
V)
<1
in
Q
v)
0
U
H
Q
Q
H
Q
H
Q
u
•i
•o
c-I
N
m
m
t4-1if
N
OC
Z
p
G ++
O '^
L _0
C: m
3 z
� a)
C +�+
(D 4)
V
a) Ln
x a"'
a) �
Q O
7 N
_0 a)
N
N
bZ
c
+-
7)
3
V)
c 4- _
D 0 f6
O O
bz O
u C
N U a)
C U
O U, aJ
a) In fa
La -0
i 4� a)
O 4�O 'a
� \ O
� � L
O Q
-0 a)
a) C —
a) O t
i LN
O
L L fa
0 0
N U a)
Y U
U f6 '}
N
N N �
U Etao
_0 E a)