My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-06-2016 PC
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2010-2019
>
PC Packets 2016
>
07-06-2016 PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/7/2017 9:56:04 AM
Creation date
6/7/2017 10:47:26 AM
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.
/
172
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 – June 8, 2016 4 <br /> <br />5. The structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this <br />matter: <br /> <br />1. Recommend Approval with Conditions <br />2. Recommend Approval as Submitted <br />3. Recommend Denial <br />4. Table <br /> <br />Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. <br /> <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 /> <br />Chair Thompson requested the applicant come forward for questions. <br /> <br />Steve Jytyla, 1494 Keithson Drive, introduced himself to the Commission. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson asked if the applicant had considered having a different design or layout for <br />the porch. <br /> <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 />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 />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.