09-08-14-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – JULY 28, 2014 6 Councilmember Holmes asked for additional information on the projected level of service at Highway 96. Ms. Kunkel reported that this intersection was given an “F” rating prior to mitigation. After the proposed mitigation, this intersection’s conditions would be improved. Councilmember Holmes understood that the wells on the TCAAP site were problematic and inquired why 64 wells were still classified as ‘unknown’ or ‘other’. Ms. Kunkel stated that the County identified all wells within their database and the intended use of these 64 wells was unknown or uncertain. Councilmember McClung questioned if any outside agencies had concerns with the AUAR. Ms. Kunkel was not aware of any specific comments or concerns. She provided a brief overview of the comments received from the Minnesota Department of Health, the City of Shoreview, MnDOT, and a local resident. MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion to adopt Resolution #2014-037 – Adopting the TCAAP Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan. The motion carried (5-0). B. Planning Case 14-017 – Setback Variance – 3441 Lake Johanna Boulevard City Planner Streff explained that at the June 4, 2014, Planning Commission meeting the applicants proposed to reconstruct and expand a nonconforming accessory structure from twenty- two (22) feet by twenty-two (22) feet to twenty-four (24) feet by twenty-six (26) feet, an increase of 140 square feet. After a close review of the application by the Commission, the variance request was tabled in order to give the applicants additional time to reevaluate their proposal and provide an alternate plan that would more closely conform to the existing nonconforming structure in terms of the building footprint and setbacks. The applicants have since reviewed and updated their plans for the nonconforming accessory structure. The proposal for the new accessory structure now includes a footprint that is identical to the existing structure with slight variations to the placement and roof design. City Planner Streff indicated that the applicants are proposing to reconstruct the twenty-two (22) foot by twenty-two (22) foot existing nonconforming accessory structure on the property. Along Fairview Avenue, the proposed structure would be realigned to be parallel with the western property line and constructed with a setback of two (2) foot two (2) inches. The previous proposal suggested a setback of eight (8) inches from the west property line. From the south property line the proposed structure would be moved to the north an additional one (1) foot, which would result in a seven (7) foot three (3) inch setback. The setback proposed between the structure and the south property line during the previous review was four (4) feet one (1) inch. City Planner Streff stated that as proposed, the roofline of the accessory structure would change from an east/west orientation to a north/south orientation in order for the garage to be accessible from the existing driveway. The new design of the accessory structure would also incorporate one