Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 8, 2016 4 <br /> <br />requesting a variance. It was his hope to have a three-season porch attached to the house and not <br />simply a deck. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson questioned if Mr. Jytyla had worked with Pulte Homes when the home was <br />built. <br /> <br />Mr. Jytyla indicated he did not have a lot of input with Pulte Homes on where the dwelling <br />would be located. He asked for the home to be moved forward but his request was not granted. <br />He explained he moved to this neighborhood because he loved the area and the school district. <br />He understood there were restrictions on the lot, but had hoped that the City would allow for a <br />variance of 42 inches given the fact he would not be vastly encroaching on his neighbors. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson inquired if Mr. Jytyla had spoken to his neighbors regarding the proposed <br />deck and porch. She noted the City had received objections from two property owners behind <br />Mr. Jytyla’s property. <br /> <br />Mr. Jytyla commented he had spoken to a number of his neighbors about the project and several <br />were willing to attend this evening in support of the project. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jones asked if the porch would be glass or screen. <br /> <br />Mr. Jytyla explained the porch would have glass that could be raised over the screens. He <br />reported the screen porch would have a fireplace in order for it to be used later in the fall. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lambeth questioned if the home was purchased on spec or if it was purchased to <br />be built. He asked if Pulte Homes disclosed the fact that the rear property line had a restriction. <br /> <br />Mr. Jytyla reported he purchased the home to be built from Pulte Homes. He indicated the <br />home came with no options and was basically bought on spec. He stated Pulte had made him <br />aware of the setback constraints, but he was uncertain as to the specifics and conducted more <br />research on this topic on his own. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hames asked if this request shed any light on the City Code regarding the <br />differences between deck and porch setbacks. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler described the differences between deck and porch rear yard setback <br />requirements. He noted that in the R-1 District, decks can encroach up to six feet into the rear <br />yard setback, but must not be closer than six feet from a property line. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hames discussed the importance of outdoor living space. She believed that the <br />homeowner was bound by the home location and that this was not of his doing. It was her <br />opinion that the homeowner was being penalized for something that was out of his control. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lambeth questioned if the porch would be constructed on piers. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler reported this was the case. <br />