06-03-2020 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 9 Commissioner Subramanian stated he appreciated the fact the neighbors were supportive. Commissioner Vijums asked if access to the egress windows below the deck would be hindered. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported the far left egress window would be upgraded to meet egress and building code requirements. He stated the other windows would remain as is. Commissioner Wicklund questioned what the square footage of the deck was currently and asked what the square footage would be of the new deck. William Tourdot, 1741 Venus Avenue, reported proposed deck was 375 square feet, noting the deck would be 20' by 12' and would have a 17' by 5' bridge. He commented further on the egress windows in the basement and reported he was not required to replace the egress windows in the laundry room. Commissioner Wicklund asked why the deck was being proposed to come straight out from the house versus having the main entrance off the driveway. Mr. Tourdot reported this matches the existing deck and the neighbors know the house by this feature. In addition, this would provide access into the main entrance of the house. Commissioner Wicklund questioned if the City has approved any other variances for residents that want to put decks in the front yard. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported there were not a whole lot of decks in front yards. He stated residents could place structures in the front yard so long as it does not exceed 30" in height and meets appropriate setbacks. He indicated once structures were above 30" railings were required, along with a permit. He explained this was a unique request given the topography of the lot and there was an existing deck. Chair Gehrig asked if this property had a backyard that supports a patio or deck. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated the back of the home has a walkout entry with a patio. Chair Gehrig commented he was understanding of the existing sunk in front yard and structure in place with the bridge that extends to the front door. He understood that the existing structure was 50 years old and was in need of replacement. He stated he was struggling with the fact the replacement deck would exceed the requirements by double for the porch section. He questioned what about the parcel was unique that a deck should be built on the front of the house when there was space in the back of the home. Mr. Tourdot indicated there were many homes in his neighborhood that had front porches and patios.