CC 02-22-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - FEBRUARY 22 1999 , IO . proposed, when 40 feet is required) for a house addition, based on the "Findings - Front and Side Yard Setback Variance" section of the Staff report dated February 3, 1999. The motion carried (3-1, Councilmember Rem opposed). Acting Mayor Aplikowski noted that there may be other options for adding living space other than relocating the home. She suggested the applicant explore any other possibilities. Mr. Delich stated he had looked into every other option he could think of and asked if the City Council had any suggestions. Councilmember Larson stated that the only suggestion he had would be to secure the fmancing to build behind the setback line. He noted, with relation to the other properties in the area, this home sticks out like a sore thumb. He pointed out that, if Lake Johanna Boulevard were widened in the future, it would bring the road very close to the house. He indicated that the intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to bring any structures which are not in compliance with the zoning Code into conformance. If the variance were granted as proposed this would be allowing an addition onto a home which is substantially out of compliance. . Mr. Delich referred to Acting Mayor Aplikowski's comment that the proposed addition would not be safe for the neighborhood and noted, if the house were relocated as proposed, it would be located within 10 feet of the alley which is not safe. He stated that he could not understand how he could be denied the variance when there are no other options available. Councilmember Malone stated it is not the responsibility ofthe City Council to provide other options. He indicated that the Code requirements are in place to ensure the general welfare and public safety of the City. When an applicant requests approval for a variance, they must demonstrate an extreme hardship in order for the variance to be supported. Mr. Delich expressed his belief that the research information he had submitted had not been reviewed. He stated that he did not understand the objections and felt there would be no objections had the research been read. He stated that he must accept the idea that he was being asked to relocate his home to within 10 feet of the alley. Councilmember Larson stated he had read the information supplied by the applicant and he drives past the home everyday. He agreed that the size of the lot creates a difficulty and this is one condition which must be met for the granting of a variance. However, there are other conditions which must be met as well. He stated that no one is automatically entitled to a variance and there are other alternatives to the proposal. He expressed his understanding that the other options may not be financially viable at this time and suggested the applicant may have to delay the project for however long it takes to save enough money. . Mr. Delich noted that the Planning Commission had a difficult time in denying the request and had suggested he look into another option prior to having the City Council consider the proposal. He indicated that he had done as he was asked and the financial issues are not the only reasons why the relocating the home is not reasonable. A number of trees would have to be removed and he would prefer for these to be preserved. He noted, if the mature trees were removed it may