My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-09-14 PC Minutes
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
PC Minutes 2014
>
07-09-14 PC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/17/2015 4:09:25 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 4:08:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – July 9, 2014 4 <br /> <br />the general location of the proposed structure. It does not appear that the variance request is <br />based on economic considerations alone. A detached accessory structure is a permitted use in the <br />R-2 Zoning District and is a reasonable request for the subject property. <br /> <br />City Planner Streff indicated that the findings of fact for this variance request support a <br />recommendation for approval. However, if the Planning Commission chooses to make a <br />recommendation for denial, the Findings of Fact would need to be amended to reflect the reasons <br />for the denial. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of this variance, Staff <br />recommends the following seven (7) conditions: <br /> <br />1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended <br />by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by <br />the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City <br />Council. <br />2. That the proposed accessory structure shall be permitted to encroach twenty (20) feet into <br />the secondary front yard setback along Shoreline Lane. <br />3. That the proposed accessory structure shall not exceed a footprint of 480 square feet. <br />4. That the exterior façade and roofing materials of the proposed garage shall be compatible <br />in appearance and material used with the principal structure. <br />5. That no living quarters shall be constructed within the proposed accessory structure and <br />that the attic area shall be used for storage purposes only. <br />6. That the structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. That building <br />and demolition permits for the construction of the new accessory building and a zoning <br />permit for the construction of the driveway shall be required. <br />7. That the applicant shall obtain a Grading and Erosion Control Permit from the City before <br />the building permit is issued. <br /> <br />City Planner Streff reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter: <br /> <br />1. Recommend Approval with Conditions <br />2. Recommend Approval as Submitted. <br />3. Recommend Denial <br />4. Table <br /> <br />Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. <br /> <br />Chair Larson asked if this was a conforming lot of record. <br /> <br />City Planner Streff explained that the subject property was a nonconforming lot. He reported <br />the lot was 8,276 square feet when the minimum lot area was 11,000 square feet in the R-2 <br />zoning district. <br /> <br />Commissioner Holewa requested further information on what trees would be removed. <br /> <br />City Planner Streff indicated that two trees would be impacted by the proposed project. Staff <br />did not believe that more than 10% of the total caliper inches of significant trees on the property <br />would be lost and for that reason, no tree replacement would be required. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.