02-22-11- J, WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—FEBRUARY 22, 2011 7 created a new process that would allow the homeowner to proceed with her plans under an Expansion Permit. That process was also challenged in court. City Planner Beekman explained that Staff is bringing this up because they believe the variance court cases have an impact on Arden Hills residents. She stated that she receives calls weekly from residents wanting to make improvements to their property and in most cases there is some regulation within the code that doesn't allow that property owner to proceed without a variance. Because of the pending legislation, she added, variance applications are not being encouraged by Staff. She further explained that the majority of the homes in our City are non-conforming and you cannot expand a non-conforming use without a variance. She stated the front yard and side yard setbacks are greater now than they were when most of the homes were built. She explained that most communities do allow for expansion up or out as long as it doesn't reduce the setbacks of the structure. City Attorney Filla stated that most non-conforming uses exist because a City has changed its regulations. Discussion ensued regarding homeowners being aware of restrictions when purchasing an existing home. City Attorney Filla stated the City cannot deny a variance on that basis. He added that most people are not given a survey that shows setbacks when purchasing a property. If you buy an existing home that doesn't meet setback requirements, that is not considered a sell-created hardship. Councilmember Holden asked if adding property value is a valid basis for a hardship. City Attorney Filla replied it is not. But he added that a petitioner has the right to expect objectivity from the Planning Commission and the Council until all the information has been -- presented. Planning Commissioner Reiff asked if the City should be offering something other than a variance for homeowners in this position. City Planner Beekman stated that variances are limited to those properties with unique features. So if the City wants to see improvements on their residential properties, the variance process should be avoided and other options should be available. City Attorney Filla stated the City could offer something like the expansion permit process currently available in other cities. He added that the old and new standards for variances contain the word "reasonable". The Council and Planning Commission have to decide what is reasonable. He also advised that if the Council or Planning Commission chooses to deny a petition, they should clearly state their reasons for that denial. Councilmember Holmes agreed that alternatives should be available as long as there are clear standards.