Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 28, 20135 <br /> <br />City Planner Streff <br /> commented the applicant is also proposing to construct an entrance <br />roof/overhang on the north side of the structure fronting Ingerson Road. The addition as proposed <br />is approximately four (4) feet in depth and eight (8) feet in length. This addition would not <br />encroach any further into the existing setback than the existing home. At its closest point the <br />roof/overhang would be approximately twenty-seven and one half (27.5) feet from the north <br />property line. A variance is being requested to expand approximately four (4) feet into the existing <br />setback. The applicant has submitted a narrative of the proposed addition, a response to the <br />variance evaluation criteria, a survey and a site plan of the property along with building <br />elevations. <br /> <br />City Planner Streff <br /> stated the submitted plans and findings of fact for this variance request <br />support a recommendation for approval. He explained the Planning Commission reviewed this <br />case on October 9, 2013 and recommended approval on a 5-1 (Holewa) vote with the following <br />four conditions: <br /> <br />1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted and dated <br />September 6, 2013, as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to <br />these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the <br />Planning Commission and City Council. <br />2. That the structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. <br />3. That the addition shall be the same color and use the same type or similar construction <br />materials as the existing structure. <br />4. That a drainage plan shall be submitted and approved by the City if the current grade of the <br />lot is altered. An erosion control permit shall be obtained if the City Engineer determines it <br />is necessary for the project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes <br /> expressed concern that the Planning Commission minutes from October <br />9, 2013, She indicated the minutes would have <br />provided the Council with further information on the Planning Case. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher <br /> discussed the 5-1 vote noting that the opposing <br />vote was due to the fact that a Commissioner believed this lot was not unique in Arden Hills and <br />that these situations should be addressed through revisions to the Zoning Code. She apologized to <br />the Council for not having the minutes within the packet. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden <br /> agreed it would have been nice to have been able to review the Planning <br />Commission minutes. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung <br /> reviewed his impression of the Planning Case based on the discussion <br />held at the Planning Commission meeting. He also agreed the minutes should have been provided <br />to the Council. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant <br /> asked if the Council had to approve the case this evening. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik <br /> commented if the Council were to table the item, the Council would need <br />to provide the applicant with written notification that the case was being extended. <br />