CCP 04-30-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular council Meeting, 4-9-90 I Page 6 CASE #90-02 (Cont'd) The applicant advised the sign displays the standard . Group Health Clinic "ICXJo" arrl the variance is requeste::l in order to maintain client recognition. Malone moved, seconded by Mahowald, that council approve the Sign Length Variance, Case #90-02, as requeste::l for the street sign located on Northwoods Drive, contingent upon the sign not exceeding 100 square feet arrl based on the the following rationale: The sign meets the spirit of the ordinance and does not exceed the minimum sign area or height requirements and meets the sign setback requirement. Motion carried unanimously. (3-0) CASE #90-03; FRONT COuncil was referr-ed to the Planner's report arrl Planning SEI'BACK VARIANCE, Commission minutes dated 4-4-90 arrl Board of Appeals 3464 SIEMS COURT, Minutes date::l 3-24-90, regarding the application for a KUDAK & FlEW front setback variance, 3464 siems Court, Kudak & Field. The Planner explained the request is to a=mmodate a two-car garage on the site and he referr-ed council to a diagram of the proposed garage placement. He noted a survey of the adjacent lots determined the average front yard setback in this neighborhood to be 30 feet. Bergly stated the applicant has been working with an architect to firxi alternate solutions for garage placement, however, due to the lilnited building envelope and topography of the lot the garage placement is extremely difficult without some type of variance. The Planner advised the Board of Appeals arrl Planning COIlllllission recommended . denial of the variance based on the negative sight-line irrpact of the garage placement on the adjacent properties arrl preference of both bodies not to set a precedent with such a dramatic setback variance. Bergly reviewed an alternative plan for the garage placement which would require a 20 ft. setback (a 10 ft. variance). The Planner briefly des=ibed the residents concerns, as note::l in Planning minutes. After discussion Council con=ed that the requested variance is extreme and will negatively irrpact this area. councilmernbers expressed sympathy for the applicant working within the building envelope constraints and suggested an atte:rrpt be made toward placement of the garage at a location which is more in line with =ent zoning standards. Malone moved, seconded by Mahowald, to deny the Front Setback Variance application, Case #90-03, based on the following: 1. There is not an identifiable hardship, 2. Granting the variance will set precedent and unduly shorten the front setbacks generally established in this area, and, 3. Placement of the garage at this location will infringe on adjacent properties site-lines. Motion carried unanimously. (3-0) CASE #90-04; SIGN Council was referr-ed to the Planner's report and Planning REL/X'ATION, 1203 minutes of 4-9-90, relative to the request for relocation . W. CO. RD. E, of the sign at Carroll's Furrliture, 1203 W. COunty Road CARROLL'S FURNITURE E. -------..- _n_______.___