CC 06-14-1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-. -. . Minutes of Regular Council Meeting Village of Arden Hills Monday, June 14, 1982 - 7:30 p.m. Village Hall Call to Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Woodburn called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Roll Call Present: Mayor Robert Woodburn, Councilmen Thomas Mulcahy, Dale Hicks, Diane McAllister, Maurice Johnson. Absent: None Also Present: Planner Orlyn Miller, Clerk Administrator Charlotte McNiesh, Deputy Clerk Dorothy Zehm Approval of Minutes Hicks moved, seconded by McAllister, that the Minutes of the May 24th Regular Council Meeting be approved as amended, and the Minutes of June 1st Special Council Meeting be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). Business from the Floor None. REPORT OF VILLAGE PLANNER ORLYN MILLER Case No. 82-11, Lot Split and Lot Area Variance Keith Tramm Council was referred to a transparency of the 19,000 sq. on which a two-family atructure exists. ft. lot Miller explained that the applicant is proposing to split the lot to coincide with the party wall between the units in order to sell one-half of the duplex. Miller explained that the resultant lots will be 10,010 sq. ft. and 9,037 sq. ft. in area (11,000 sq. ft. are required/single family lot; 8,000 sq. ft./unit for two-family structure). Miller reported thaa the duplex use is currently under a Special Use Permit; concern of Planning Commission and Board of Appeals is the ~reation to two sub-standard size lots on which two single- family homes could be constructed, if the duplex should be removed or destroyed. Miller advised that one other duplex lot has been divided in this manner, after the dwellings were constructed; lot area met the district requirements, but lot' widths were sub-standard. Keith Tramm said his grandmother lives in one unit and would like to stay there; explained that his family is out-growing the other unit and he would, therefore, like to sell his unit only; suggested that owner occupied units are generally maintained better than rental units. In discussion, it was noted that the duplex was built in 1976 (duplex on Hamline Avenue in 1977); City has a limited number of duplexes at present (lot split requests are not, therefore, a major problem). Concern was expressed that, in some instances, there may be access conditions which would not be conducive to..a lot split (e.g. duplex on Cleveland Avenue, near County Road D, which has a single accesa drive) . After discussion, Hicks moved, seconded by McAllister, that Council request the applicant to apply for a Planned Unit Development Per- mit for the two proposed lots; $80.00 fee previously paid to be deducted from the fee for Planned Unit Development Application. Motion carried unanimously (5-0).