CC 02-23-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - FEBRUARY 23.1998 7 . Mr. Mack reviewed the improvements which will be included in the first and subsequent phases. He stated they are on track with what the Planning Commission recommended and this is a priority project for the County. 2. Case #98-02, Sawhorse, Inc., Variance, 3465 Siems Court Mr. Ringwald used an overhead map to identify the site under consideration. He explained the applicant is requesting approval of a side yard setback variance for a garage addition (seven feet is proposed when ten feet is required) and for a house addition (seven feet is proposed when ten feet is required) on a single family lot zoned R-I. He noted the Planning Commission, on June 3, 1992, did recommend approval of Planning Case #92-10 for a side yard setback variance on a garage addition on the subject property and the Council, on June 8, 1992, approved the variance request. However, the homeowner did not construct the garage and sold the property. The new property owner is now requesting reapproval of the garage variance in addition to a living space expansion variance. . Mr. Ringwald displayed the proposed first floor house plan which creates a second garage stall and living area behind the two-car garage. He noted the proposed second stall garage is just large enough to accommodate a car and not over-sized, which is similar to the variance previously approved. Mr. Ringwald explained the City has not traditionally allowed living space to infringe into side yards, especially if there are alternate locations that could be used. He pointed out an alternate area on this site which could be used to expand the living space. Mr. Ringwald reported that the Planning Commission felt the living space variance should not be approved since a hardship is not shown and there is an alternate area which could be used. Mr. Ringwald reviewed the discussion held at the Planning Commission regarding the concern for erosion between the garage and the side lot line. He noted the design of the roof which is now designed towards the common property line in an effort to reduce erosion. Mr. Ringwald stated this is also acceptable with the adjoining property owner. He then displayed and reviewed the rear elevation of the house and garage. Mr. Ringwald displayed the revised front elevation of the house with the garage addition but without the living space addition. He then displayed the revised rear elevation and noted the reduced impact. Mr. Ringwald advised that the Planning Commission is recommending approval of the garage addition variance and requiring erosion control and turf establishment. However, they recommend denial of the living space variance. He recommended, if the Council considers approval, that the new revised elevations be considered rather than the elevations presented at the Planning Commission meeting and referenced in their motion. Mayor Probst noted this living space addition could be constructed if it was offset by three feet from the side property line. Mr. Ringwald stated this is correct and was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting but the applicant was concerned about the loss of space caused by the three foot offset. . Councilmember Aplikowski stated she viewed the property earlier today and believes a hardship may be present due to the small size of the lot. She stated whether or not the house addition is included it would not impact the neighboring house. Councilmember Aplikowski stated she