10-08-25 PC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2025 9 of the opinion, others could. She did not support taking an existing non-conforming situation and making it even more non-conforming. She stated she would consider tabling this item. Commissioner Birken reported this was a difficult request. She understood the applicant did not have to have this large of a house, especially given the size of the lot, but noted her primary concern was with the shore impact zone. She stated 20% to 30% of the home would be in the shore impact zone. She feared that if this request were approved, the door would be open to allowing future requests for homes to be built into the shoreland impact area by 30%. She indicated this would compromise the water quality and increase erosion. Commissioner Erler commented this was a tough one for him. He stated after weighing the various criteria for the variances, in some cases the proposed design improves the property and in other cases the proposed design would make matters worse. He explained he understood this was an extremely challenging lot and that the property owner had a right to build on the lot. He believed the proposed home design was very well done, but he was of the opinion the home was too large for the lot size and neighborhood. He requested the applicant consider a new plan that was less imposing and while also reducing the non-conformities. Commissioner Bjorklund stated he believed the third story on the home had to be eliminated. He reported this would reduce the home by 642 square feet. He explained he understood the shoreland concerns and noted erosion was a real concern. He recommended permeable pavers be required for the driveway. He recommended action on this item be tabled until some of the concerns being raised by the Commission can be addressed by the applicant. Chair Collins summarized the comments from the Commission noting this request had too many asks and there was concern with how the lake will be impacted by the proposed home. In addition, there were concerns that an approval of this request would set a precedent for future homes to encroach into the shore impact zone. City Administrator Jagoe commented if the Commission was leaning towards tabling action on this item, she requested specific direction be provided to the applicant on what items should be further addressed. She reported the 60 day review period would have to be extended if the Commission were to table action on this item. Chair Collins clarified design changes could be qualified as recommendations to the City Council. City Administrator Jagoe reported this was the case. She indicated staff could review the elevations for the building again, because the numbers the applicant was coming in with were different than the numbers staff had. Councilmember Weber indicated the Planning Commission could also make a recommendation for denial and list the reasons for denial and this information would be passed along to the City Council. He noted this would still get the point across to the City Council. Commissioner Jacobson stated she was struggling with considering any building on this property given the impact that the home would have into the shore impact zone. Chair Collins explained at this time, the Commission would require additional information from the applicant regarding a shoreland mitigation plan, a tree inventory, and FAR guidance.