Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - February 27,2006 <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated she did believe trees were a hardship and the trees were an <br />important aspect of the community. She stated Arden Hills is noted for its trees and it is <br />important to the neighborhood to retain the trees. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked if any other variance would be required if the lot line were moved <br />six feet. Mr. Lehnhoff responded that an additional variance would be required to create a non- <br />conforming lot width. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated it appeared there were other options here. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated thc problem remained that the justification for the hardship <br />would be trees and that was not a standard that they have Llsed as a justification for a variance. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski stated she knew there were instances in the past where they had denied a <br />building of a garage due to trees being destroyed in the process. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated the owner had said he was willing to move the house and if they <br />did not approve the Minor Subdivision, it appeared to him that they should send this back to the <br />Plal111ing Commission. <br /> <br />Mr. Findell stated he would still want an easement between the houses so they remained 25 feet <br />apart. He stated they would be comfortable with the 89-foot lot. Councilmember Larson stated <br />he did not believe an 89-foot lot would address the hardship issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Findell stated moving the house was possible, but he was concerned about the loss of trees. <br />He indicated they would preserve as many trees as possible, but there was no guarantee the trees <br />would survive. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski asked if they could approve this with a different variance. Mr. Lehnhoff <br />responded they could not approve a different variance tonight and that it would have to go back <br />to the Plal111ing Commission. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden called the question. <br /> <br />Mr. Lehnhoff inquired about the park dedication fee. Councilmember Larson amended his <br />motion to establish the park dedication fee of $4,808.00, which was base don the value of the <br />new lot only. <br /> <br />The motion carried (3-1). (Councilmember Holden opposed). <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a <br />motion to deny Plal111ing Case No. 06-002, Gary Findell, 1401 Skiles <br />Lane, variance based on the absence of a demonstrated hardship consistent <br />with the findings of the Planning Commission. The motion carried (3-1) <br />(Councilmember Holden opposed). <br />