12-04-19 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – November 6, 2019 8 in size. He commented on Exhibit C which addressed the three stories of the proposed home. He stated there was a discrepancy between the square footages between the proposed plans and the actual plans. He objected to what was happening and recommended the Commission not approve the variance. Mr. Day explained he was also concerned with the proposed height of the new home as it would be 17 feet higher than his home. He feared this would negatively impact his property value. He noted there were no homes on Sandeen Road that were three stories in height. He indicated the proposed home was not keeping in line with the character of the neighborhood. He reviewed photos of the homes in the neighborhood and reiterated the fact that the proposed home did not have the same character. He believed the proposed home was not the right home for the property and recommended the Commission deny the variance. Steve Campbell, 3248 Sandeen Road, stated he shared the same feelings as Mr. Day. He explained the applicant was proposing a very large house for a very small lot. He indicated this was completely out of character for the neighborhood. He reported this house would be taller than it was wide and would block sunlight from the neighboring homes. He recommended action on this item be tabled to allow the applicant to work with the City and the neighbors to allow for the plans to be modified. Megan Kell, Kell Architects representing the applicant, reiterated that this was not a designed house yet. She noted a feasibility study had been completed for the owners so they understood what type of home could be built on the lot. She reported a height variance was not being requested. She explained the FAR variance requests were for below grade and would not impact the neighbors. She reported the extra basement space was needed for physical therapy for the owner’s special needs child. She indicated the property owners wanted to be good neighbors and were saddened by the fact so many of the neighbors were objecting to the project. She commented the 30-foot setback has not been a concern for the neighbors and would actually protect the views of the lake for the neighbors. Commissioner Subramanian commented the request had two main variables which were the non-conforming lot size and the non-conforming house size. He indicated the lot size cannot be adjusted but noted the house size could be adjusted. He questioned how the psychology of the neighbors would be impacted by looking at a 70-foot wall for the proposed home. Commissioner Wicklund requested further comment regarding the FAR. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla explained the FAR ratio was in place to assure that properties were sized properly to accommodate the proposed structure on the lot. He noted the subject property was unique because it was only 9,400 square feet. He explained the proposed house would work on a normal sized lot (11,000 square feet). He commented further on how the City does not dictate the architecture of homes. Mr. Day asked if the physical therapy area room, mechanical room and bathroom only took up 534 square feet of the basement. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla deferred this question to the applicant. He noted the applicant was calculating the numbers on the plan. He commented on