Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 27.1997 <br /> <br />9 <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone stated that, although the applicant's request seems to be a good <br />compromise, he remembers the original land owner being told there would be no variances <br />allowed in his site plan. <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski expressed her concern with an after-the-fact variance request, and <br />also stated she does not find garages placed out in front of houses aesthetically pleasing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hicks inquired if the drainage easement constitutes a hardship. Mr. Ringwald <br />stated that it would, as it puts limits on the type of house that can be constructed on this lot. <br />Councilmember Hicks asked if there were presently houses on the other lots in this addition, and <br />if they were of a comparable size to the proposed house. <br /> <br />John Gurtek, applicant, stated the proposed house is of a comparable size to other houses in the <br />development. He reported that the residents on the other eight lots have been surveyed, and they <br />all approve of the proposed variance. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hicks inquired if the site plans of the other eight houses required a variance. <br />Mr. Gurtek stated they did not. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hicks inquired if another house of equal value but of a different layout could be <br />built on this lot A discussion ensued regarding the different floor plans of houses in this <br />development, their approximate value, and the poor sales potential of a house with a lower <br />square footage than of those surrounding it. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated although the record reflects the developer was informed there would be no <br />variances of site plans in this location, the builder at the present time is not the same as when this <br />project was initiated. He stated he has no concerns with the recommendations of the Planning <br />Commission. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hicks stated although he shares the concern of the timing of this variance <br />request, he allowed that a la-foot variance was not a major concern, that the drainage easement <br />does present a problem, and that the house should be of comparable value to those surrounding it. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Hicks moved and Keirn seconded a motion to approve Planning Case #97-01, <br />Gurtek, 4315 Colleen Court, Variance, allowing a lO-foot front yard setback <br />variance of the garage portion only of the house plan, and based on the conditions <br />outlined by the Planning Commission and shown on Plan Dla, and based on the <br />rationale of the hardship of the drainage easement placement. The motion carried <br />unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone inquired regarding the addition of a deck, whether posts would be <br />allowed or if it would need to be cantilevered. Mr. Ringwald stated the decks would need to be <br />cantilevered out over the drainage easement, no posts would be allowed. Mr. Ringwald further <br />stated that no structures of any kind are allowed in the drainage easement, such as playsets or <br />storage buildings. <br />