10-4-1989 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Planning Commission Minutes, 10-4-89 Page 4 CASE #89-15 (Cont'd) 3. The Park Dedication issue be resolved by Council liaison. 4. The site grading be performed in conjunction with the construction of the home • on Parcel A. 5. The minimum elevation of the site grade at the building perimeter on both lots be no lower than 975.2 feet. With the stipulation that conditions 1 thru 3 be satisfied prior to filing the minor subdivision and conditions 4 and 5 be satisfied prior to building permit issuance, and further that no consideration be given for setback variances on Lot A in the future and that 975.2 feet minimum building elevation be recorded and filed as part of the minor subdivision. Motion carried. (Zehm, Winiecki, Probst, Martin, Piotrowski, and Woodburn voting in favor; Carlson opposed) (6-1) CASE #89-17; VAR. Planner Bergly explained the application is for front SETBACKS, FRONT yard and lakeshore setback variances for a residence YARD & LKSHORE, proposed to be constructed on Lot 19, Block 2, Arden 3435 SIEMS CT, Hills Addition, Charles & Sylvia St. Sauver, 3435 Siems ST. SAUVER Court. Bergly stated the existing house on the property has major structural defects and the owner has advised it would be more costly to bring the house up to standards than to remove the house and rebuild on the site. He noted the proposed new structure would need a variance of 10 feet for the front yard and 20 feet for the lakeshore setback; new sideyard setbacks would conform to the current requirements. The Planner noted that homes and lots on this cul-de-sac are designed to fit the • land instead of designed to fit the current ordinance requirements. The homesites are unusual shapes, different depths and widths to accommodate the unique topography. Bergly advised the front and rear setback on other nearby lots vary considerably and the proposed home generally will be placed in the same location as the old one; the new home will be turned slightly resulting in trade-offs in the open setback areas. Planner Bergly reviewed several factors that indicate the requested variances are appropriate and meet the stipulations of the variance provision in the Zoning Ordinance. He recommended approval based on the factors listed in his report. Commission was referred to the Board of Appeals minutes of 9-26-89, recommending approval of the requested variances and requesting the utility lines be placed underground. Charles and Sylvia St. Sauver were present and agreed to place utilities underground. Commission questioned if State agency or Rice Creek Watershed District approval would be needed for the lakeshore setback variance. Bergly stated State agency approval would not be necessary as the enforcement of the setback requirement is designated to the local government entity; the State • requires utilizing customary restraints during construction, such as containing run-off. Commission suggested the applicant check with Rice Creek Watershed District to see if there are any restrictions or approvals necessary for the lakeshore variance.