Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—June 8, 2016 3 <br /> 13. The proposed addition would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood <br /> because it would result in a structure that is consistent and compatible with other <br /> construction in the area. <br /> 14. The requested variance does not appear to be based on economic considerations alone. <br /> Senior Planner Bachler stated that the findings of fact for this variance request support a <br /> recommendation for approval. If the Planning Commission chooses to make a recommendation <br /> for denial, the Findings of Fact would need to be amended to reflect the reasons for the denial. If <br /> the Planning Commission recommends approval of this variance, staff recommends the <br /> following five conditions: <br /> 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the <br /> conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City <br /> Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City <br /> Council. <br /> 2. A building permit shall be required prior to commencement of construction. <br /> 3. The porch addition shall match the color and architectural style of the rest of the principal <br /> structure. <br /> 4. An encroachment of 3 feet — 6 inches shall be permitted for the porch addition into the <br /> 30-foot rear setback requirement. This will result in a setback of 26 feet— 6 inches from <br /> the rear property line. <br /> 5. The structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. <br /> Senior Planner Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this <br /> matter: <br /> 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions <br /> 2. Recommend Approval as Submitted <br /> 3. Recommend Denial <br /> 4. Table <br /> Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. <br /> Commissioner Lambeth explained that with the setback requirements and easements on this <br /> property, only 20% of the lot remained buildable. He believed the applicant's request was <br /> reasonable and stated he supported the 42-inch encroachment into the rear yard setback for the <br /> proposed porch. <br /> Chair Thompson requested the applicant come forward for questions. <br /> Steve Jytyla, 1494 Keithson Drive, introduced himself to the Commission. <br /> Chair Thompson asked if the applicant had considered having a different design or layout for <br /> the porch. <br /> Mr. Jytyla stated he looked at numerous options for the porch and deck addition. He explained <br /> that none of the options met his family's and the City's requirements. For this reason, he was <br />