07-06-1988 Planning Commission Agenda-Minutes

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting, July 6, 1988 Page 4 CASE #88-21 (Cont'd) Malone moved, seconded by Probst, that Commission recommend to Council approval of Case #88-21, Minor • Subdivision/Lot Split, Lot 11, Block 2, Lakeshore Homesites Addition, Phyllis Bona, subject to: 1. A drainage and utility easement be provided along the lot line dividing Parcel "A" and Parcel "B", that easement to extend an equal distance on either side of the lot line as acceptable to the City Engineer and the swale be regarded to follow the lot line and provide property definition. 2. The sheds that encroach on the newly created lot line be moved to meet the required 10 foot setback for accessory buildings in the R-1 District. Motion carried unanimously. (7-0) CASE #88-22; SITE Planner Bergly referred Commission to his report of PLAN REVIEW & VAR. 7-6-88, regarding the site plan review and variance PKING. LOT SURFACE for parking lot surface material as submitted by Bethel MATERIAL, BETHEL COL. College. The Planner extended his apology to Board of Appeals Chair Barbara Piotrowski and stated that although the application identifies the need for a variance it was not received prior to the Board of Appeals June meeting. Acting Chair Meury questioned if the usual procedure was for the application to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals prior to Planning Commission review. Bergly stated in this case it involves a technicality in surface materials and not a dimensional configuration; it was his understanding past policy had been • the Board of Appeals reviewed variances in terms of visual or physical impact. Member Piotrowski stated she preferred all applications for variances be reviewed by the Board of Appeals and stated the matter had been discussed at length last year with Planner Miller, Zoning Administrator Iago and Clerk Administrator Morrison. Piotrowski moved, seconded by Carlson, that Commission table Case #88-22 until proper procedure has been followed and the Board of Appeals has reviewed and made recommendation relative to the application. Motion carried. (Piotrowski, Carlson, McGraw and Probst voting in favor; Malone and Zehm opposed; Meury abstained) (4-2-1) Commission discussed the procedure for receiving applications and forwarding same to the Planning Commission and Board of Appeals. Craig Hjelle, representing Bethel College, stated it was not his intent to bypass the Board of Appeals only to expedite the application due to time constraints for completion of the project. It was his understanding the proper procedures were being followed. After discussion, Commission requested the Planner review the current procedures for application submission deadlines, time constraints for preparation of the planning reports for Board of Appeals and Planning Commission consideration at their meetings and make recommendation to Commission at the next regular meeting held August 3rd. Acting Chair Meury commented that the abandoned vehicles and unsightly materials were still present near the construction site of the new storage building. Meury stated he recalled the applicant had advised the materials and vehicles would be removed within 30 days. Hjelle stated the equipment will eventually be stored inside the new building and he is working with the administration and students to remove the vehicles.