PC 04-02-2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 8 . Commissioner Modesette stated her property had a telephone pole right in the middle of it. Mr. Gode noted every lot on Glen Arden Road was 80 feet by 200 feet and the poles were spaced 80 feet apart. Chair Sand noted Ms. Richards was concerned that they did not have 80 feet on their property. There were no further comments made for or against the Site Plan Review. Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 8:5 I p.m. Commissioner Larson asked staff if a building permit application were approved and issued, would the property line have to be established and located in order to get it in the right location. Mr. Parrish responded it all depended on the circumstances. Re noted if the resident found the stake and could measure it, they would not require a survey. He stated if there was a question about the property line, the building inspector could verify the line or they could require a survey. Commissioner Larson asked what was the front setback. Mr. Hellegers replied the front setback was 40 feet. Commissioner Larson asked if they had room to the front for this garage. Mr. Hellegers . replied they probably could not put anything much further forward than proposed. Commissioner Larson moved, seconded by Commissioner Ricke to deny Planning Case #03-09, Bruce Gode, 3538 Glen Arden Road, Variance for the following reason: . The state Statute definition of "undue hardship" is not met. In Chapter 462.357, Subdivision 6, (2), defines "undue hardship" as a situation where: "... the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.. .". However, in this particular instance the official controls would allow the applicant a reasonable use; construct a two-car garage somewhere behind the house or continue to have an attached one-car garage. Also, as stated in staff s report, the property could be put to a reasonable use without the granting of a variance and therefore, does not demonstrate that there is an undue hardship. The motion carned unanimously (6-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. COUNTY E-2 AND CLEVELAND A VENUE MORATORIUM. . Mr. Rellegers stated the City Council approved a moratorium on certain parcels in the vicinity of County Road E-2 and Cleveland Avenue on February IO, 2003. These parcels were currently zoned R-2. The current situation could result in development, which is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. As a result of the moratorium, the Planning Commission needed to review the affected area to determine whether the