CCP 06-24-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

------------ ~ 'I DRAFT ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 5.1996 4 I -I 1. If the building is damaged or destroyed by any cause in excess of fifty percent (50%) of the fair market value of said building, as determined by the building inspector, then the side yard I (north property line) setback variance as explicitly shown on Exhibit A, page 1 of 3 of this memorandum would become null and void. Mr. Ringwald noted that if a recommendation is made, this case would be heard by the Council on I June 24, 1996. Keith McFarland, 3254 Sandeen Road, stated he had no objection to the variance request. He I stated the existing garage needs attention, and that the variance would help. He stated one oak tree existed close to the variance area, and hoped that construction would take place after the oak wilt I season had past. He stated some branches may have to be removed due to the height of the proposed addition. Carrie Jones, 3245 Sandeen Road, inquired where the construction would take place, as she would I be opposed to construction in the hardwood tree area. Mr. Ringwald stated where the existing I garage is located, and that the applicant intended construction on the existing garage, not the area containing the hardwood trees. Chair Erickson closed the public hearing at 7:56 p.m. .. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. McFarland had spoken to the applicant about his concern I regarding the oak tree. Mr. McFarland stated he had not, but intended to do so. Chair Erickson stated that Council approval of this planning case would likely occur in late June and I by the time the applicant started construction it most likely would be after oak wilt season had past. Commissioner Piotrowski inquired why there was a difference in the side yard variance request from I 2.4 feet and four feet. Mr. Ringwald stated the house is angled on the lot. Chair Erickson inquired what the applicant interids to construct. Mr. Ringwald stated the applicant I wishes to construct a three-stall garage instead of the two-stall garage that exists now. He stated it was his understanding that no living area will be constructed. I Mr. McFarland stated the applicant had just shown him the blueprints and the two bedrooms are being proposed above the garage. He stated the -addition would raise the house profile, but will still I look acceptable. Mr. Ringwald stated that was not his understanding. Chair Erickson stated that construction plans have not been required in the past, and that they are I needed in his opinion. Chair Erickson inquired if the addition of living space changes staffs recommendation. Mr. Ringwald stated no. Discussion was held on one-story and two-story homes .. I