CCP 11-13-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Planning Commission Meeting, 11-7-90 Page 3 CASE #90-16 (Oont'd) 'Ihe Planner recommended approval of the rear yard . variance of 2.4 ft., to allow a 12 by 16 foot addition to the =nstruction on the south side of the residence at 1388 Arden Oaks Drive, based on the above findings. Planner Bergly referred Commission to a letter from an adjacent property owner, Cheryl swenson, 1376 Arden Oaks Drive, stating objection to the requested variance based on reduced site line from her property. Chair Probst suggested if the applicant placed the garage parallel to the westerly street line, the requested variance may be reduced to accomplish the same outcome. Bergly advised the applicant plans to add on to the =ent garage, not reconstruct the entire wilding. Mrs. Hauck referred to the letter from Cheryl SWenson arrl stated she did not request any specific setbacks for construction of the SWenson residence. Member winiecki suggested that SWenson may have been advised of =ent ordinance requirements arrl was misinterpreting the information as coming from Mrs. Hauck. Commission =n=ed that no identifiable hardships are present relating to the front yard setback variance requested. Petersen moved, seconded by winiecki, that Commission . reconunend to Council denial of the Front Yard Variance request, Case #90-16, based on no identifiable physical hardship arrl the fact that the addition would extend beyond the site line for the adjacent properties on Arden Oaks Drive. Motion =ied unanimously. (8-0) Winiecki moved, seconded by Woodburn, that Commission reconunend to Council approval of the Rear Yard Setback of 2.4 feet, Case #90-16, for a building addition arrl deck, based on the findings listed in the Planner's memorandum dated 11-7-90 arrl that the variance as requested will pose no adverse effect to the adjacent properties. Motion carried. (winiecki, Woodbrrn, Probst, Carlson, Petersen, Zehm arrl Ashbach voting in favor; piotrowski opposed) (7-1) Member piotrowski stated there is no physical hardship identified to justify the rear setback variance requested. Planner Bergly stated the unusual shape of the lot arrl the placement of the home would qualify as justifiable hardships for this request; noted the builder of the home used the east side yard of the lot as the rear lot, as indicated by the setback dimensions on the survey. PRELIM. DISC; Planner Bergly advised Commission that Hans Hagen had DEVELOFMENT requested placement on the November 7 Agenda to discuss CONCEPT', CLEVELlIND a development concept for property located at the & CO. RD. E-2 southeast quadrant of Clevelarrl Avenue and County Road HANS HAGEN E-2. . 'Ihe Planner explained the =iginal proposal for development of this parcel of larrl was presented to Commission approxinately 1-1/2 years ago for the Hans Hagen Oorporate Headquarters; since that time the office market has changed dramatically arrl Hagen is present to discuss a different use of the site.