02-24-2020-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – February 5, 2020 7 Mr. Brown stated he had spoken to Catherine and Trace Robinson, the homeowners to the north, along with the neighbors to the south. He explained he has had a relationship with these neighbors since 2013. He noted the Robinson’s use their lake home as a vacation property noting they live in Houston, Texas. Commissioner Wicklund requested further information regarding the footings that were already in the ground. Mr. Kirklin reported these footings were for the existing deck. He noted these would be removed and only two would be put in place. Chair Gehrig stated the applicant was requesting a 13’ 5” deck. He questioned how this deck would be used by the applicant. Mr. Brown explained the deck would be used for outdoor dining space. John Lily, attorney representing Catherine Robinson and Trace Ritt, stated his client’s home was at 3167 Shoreline Lane. He noted he provided the City with a written submission. He respectfully disagreed with Commission Lambeth noting the proposed deck would impact the neighbors. He commented on the legal requirements for a practical difficulty and stated this request had not met the standards. He feared if the City were to approve this variance request a precedent would be set for future deck expansion requests. He anticipated there were many homes on the lake that wanted to extend their decks closer to the lake. He explained there was than enough usable space to install a deck. While he understood this lake lot was uniquely sized, he stated this was not enough of a reason to approve the variance. He commented further on how the proposed deck would adversely impact the view his clients have of the lake. He reiterated that financial difficulty did not meet the standard within Statute to approve a variance. Commissioner Wicklund stated after hearing comments from the neighbors representative he had several questions. He asked if staff recommended it was not advisable to make decisions based on views. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated this was correct. He noted the City had reached out to the watershed district and the DNR and received no comments. He reported staff had also discussed the matter with the City Attorney and he was advised a determination on the variance should be made by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Wicklund questioned who governed docks and dock sizes. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla explained the City had some regulations in place for dock widths at the shoreline. Commissioner Wicklund stated it may be helpful, from an educational standpoint, to let the residents that have raised concerns know about the City’s dock standards. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported staff would follow up with these residents. He commented further on the impervious surface questions that were raised by the neighbors. DRAFT explained the deck would be used for outdoor dining space. DRAFT explained the deck would be used for outdoor dining space. , attorney representing Catherine Robinson and Trace Ritt, stated his DRAFT, attorney representing Catherine Robinson and Trace Ritt, stated his at 3167 Shoreline Lane. He noted he provided the City with a written submission. He DRAFTat 3167 Shoreline Lane. He noted he provided the City with a written submission. He respectfully disagreed with Commission Lambeth noting the proposed deck would imp DRAFTrespectfully disagreed with Commission Lambeth noting the proposed deck would imp neighbors. He commented on the legal requirements for a practical difficulty and stated this DRAFTneighbors. He commented on the legal requirements for a practical difficulty and stated this He feared if the City were to approve this variance request a DRAFTHe feared if the City were to approve this variance request a precedent would be set for future deck expansion request DRAFTprecedent would be set for future deck expansion requests. DRAFTs. homes on the lake that wanted to extend their decks closer to the lake. DRAFThomes on the lake that wanted to extend their decks closer to the lake. than enough usable space to install a deck. While he understood this lake lot was uniquely sized, DRAFTthan enough usable space to install a deck. While he understood this lake lot was uniquely sized, he stated this was not enough of a reason to approve the variance. DRAFThe stated this was not enough of a reason to approve the variance. the proposed deck would adversely impact the view his clients have of the lake. He reiterated that DRAFTthe proposed deck would adversely impact the view his clients have of the lake. He reiterated that financial difficulty did not meet the standard within Statute to approve a variance. DRAFTfinancial difficulty did not meet the standard within Statute to approve a variance. mmissioner Wicklund DRAFTmmissioner Wicklund stated after hearing comments from the neighbors representative he DRAFTstated after hearing comments from the neighbors representative he had several questions. He asked if staff recommended it was not advisable to make decisions DRAFThad several questions. He asked if staff recommended it was not advisable to make decisions