Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION / COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />AUGUST 4, 2004 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />Commissioners Ricke and Zimmerman both indicated that sometimes it is difficult to tell if what <br />the applicants are representing as their only option for development is in fact their only option. <br /> <br />The Commissioners and Councilmembers asked to receive their Planning Commission packets at <br />least one week prior to the Planning Commission meeting. <br /> <br />Chair Sand asked staff to be more stringent with potential variance applicants. <br /> <br />Commissioners Larson and Ricke indicated that often the hardship criteria stating "whether the <br />hardship was caused by the property owner" are almost always listed as no in the staff report. <br />The Commissioners indicated they think that even if it is the second or third owner, the current <br />owner is still responsible for conditions created by prior property owners. Researching these <br />conditions is part of the due diligence in purchasing a property. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand said that if an application doesn't meet the criteria for a variance it is staffs <br />role to make a recommendation to deny and then the Planning Commission (and Council) can <br />agrce or disagree. <br /> <br />Commissioner Larson recommended that staff track variances to determine if there's a problem <br />with a particular part of the Zoning Ordinance and if so, staff and the Planning Commission will <br />know what needs to be fixed. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski indicated that some variances deserve a little more leniency; i.e. constructing <br />two-car garages that are 4-5 feet from property lines, workshop spaces for garages, decks to be <br />closer to property lines. <br /> <br />Commissioners and Councilmembers discussed whether staff should include recommendations <br />on staff reports or just analyze the infonnation and not include a recommendation. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Clark stated that applicants routinely ask staff what their <br />chances are for getting an item approved, so whether or not staff makes a recommendation there <br />is an expectation by the applicant that staffwi11 communicate precedents of the reviewing bodies. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked staff what percentage of potential variance cases go before the <br />Planning Commission and Council. <br /> <br />City Planner Hellegers stated that he did not know the exact percentage but many cases never <br />reach a fonnal application after staff informs the applicant of the Ordinance language and the <br />likelihood of the application receiving denial. <br /> <br />3. Buildinl!: Materials <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated that he thought Planned Unit Developments (PUD's) were more of <br />a negotiation. The developers always know what they want from the City when they make an <br />application, so the City should know what they want from the developer as well. He stated that <br />