CC 05-08-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MAY 8, 2000 3 . Councilmember Aplikowski asked for clarification with regard to the difference between a dormitory and a boarding house, and whether the ordinance recognizes the difference. She added that the ordinance pertaining to boarding houses limits the number of people to five, although there is nothing limiting the amount of parking. Councilmember Larson stated the City needs to address this issue. He cited a case involving a home on the east side of Old Snelling which was occupied by students and was not kept up. He noted the house was unattractive until it was resold and turned back into a single family dwelling. He reiterated the issue needs to be addressed soon with the growth of Bethel and two colleges within the community. Mr. Lynch stated that a discussion pertaining to ordinance changes is scheduled for June's Worksession, and this could be reviewed as part ofthe overall discussion with the Planning Commission. Mayor Probst asked what the earliest possible enactment date might be. Mr. Lynch stated a public hearing would need to be held the following month, so the changes could be enacted sixty (60) days after June. He agreed this would not be quick enough to deal with the current issue. . Mayor Probst stated the homeowner in question could be notified that the Council is considering changes to the ordinance, adding this might cause the sale of the home to fall through, or the homeowner might consider other buyers. Mr. Carlson stated he believes there are other parties interested in the house. He asked whether the homeowner would be grandfathered in if changes were enacted after the house closing. Mayor Probst stated that would depend upon the sequence of events. He reiterated it would be appropriate to alert both the buyer and seller that the City is in the process of actively changing the ordinance, and the potential buyer might rethink their interest in the property. Mr. Carlson noted that the property in question lies both in Arden Hills and Roseville, and asked whether Roseville could enforce their ordinance on their half of the property. Mayor Probst stated that this might cause pro blems for the potential tenant. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Planning Case #00-]4, Chuck Mertensotto (Front Yard Setback Variance) Mr. Chuck Mertensotto presented new drawings of the proposed changes to his property, which include a new frontal view and measurements. He added the portion he is most concerned with is at the northeast comer of the house, closest to the roadway. . Mr. Lynch stated that City staff has not had an opportunity to review Mr. Mertensotto's new plans, which he was asked to provide before the meeting for this purpose. He expressed concern that the Council would be reviewing a situation with no input from staff. He added the new City Planner, Jennifer Chaput, should have the chance to review the case and meet with Mr. Mertensotto before further action.