My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-06-20 PC
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
PC Minutes 2020
>
05-06-20 PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/1/2020 1:35:00 PM
Creation date
7/1/2020 1:34:56 PM
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.
/
11
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 – May 6, 2020 9 <br /> <br />Commissioner Subramanian stated he appreciated the fact the neighbors were supportive. <br /> <br />Commissioner Vijums asked if access to the egress windows below the deck would be hindered. <br /> <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported the far left egress window <br />would be upgraded to meet egress and building code requirements. He stated the other windows <br />would remain as is. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wicklund questioned what the square footage of the deck was currently and <br />asked what the square footage would be of the new deck. <br /> <br />William Tourdot, 1741 Venus Avenue, reported proposed deck was 375 square feet, noting the <br />deck would be 20’ by 12’ and would have a 17’ by 5’ bridge. He commented further on the <br />egress windows in the basement and reported he was not required to replace the egress windows <br />in the laundry room. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wicklund asked why the deck was being proposed to come straight out from the <br />house versus having the main entr ance off the driveway. <br /> <br />Mr. Tourdot reported this matches the existing deck and the neighbors know the house by this <br />feature. In addition, this would provide access into the main entrance of the house. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wicklund questioned if the City has approved any other variances for residents <br />that want to put decks in the front yard. <br /> <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported there were not a whole lot <br />of decks in front yards. He stated residents could place structures in the front yard so long as it <br />does not exceed 30” in height and meets appropriate setbacks. He indicated once structures were <br />above 30” railings were required, along with a permit. He explained this was a unique request <br />given the topography of the lot and there was an existing deck. <br /> <br />Chair Gehrig asked if this property had a backyard that supports a patio or deck. <br /> <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated the back of the home has a <br />walkout entry with a patio. <br /> <br />Chair Gehrig commented he was understanding of the existing sunk in front yard and structure <br />in place with the bridge that extends to the front door. He understood that the existing structure <br />was 50 years old and was in need of replacement. He stated he was struggling with the fact the <br />replacement deck would exceed the requirements by double for the porch section. He questioned <br />what about the parcel was unique that a deck should be built on the front of the house when there <br />was space in the back of the home. <br /> <br />Mr. Tourdot indicated there were many homes in his neighborhood that had front porches and <br />patios. <br /> <br />Jennifer Granick, 1741 Venus Avenue, reported in her neighborhood there were a lot of front <br />patios but because of the elevation of her home she could not have a patio. She discussed the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.