PCP 06-07-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 3, 2006 6 causing the development prohlems. He stated he was concerned that Lot 1 was 1/6 the . size of Lot 4, and Lots 2 and 3 were half the size of Lot 4. He believed he was keeping too mueh of Lot 4 and was forcing them to deal with a difficult situation with the other lots. Mr. Horita responded that at least one-half of Lot 4 was in the easement for the lift station or was wetland, so to look at the entire square footage was misrepresenting the fact that there was space to build on and there was room to encroach on his back area, He notcd rcmoving the easements would make his lot very consistent with Lots 2 and 3. He acknowledged Lot I was considcrably smaller. Vice Chair Zimmerman stated he was concerned that he the property, but was not the applicant Commissioner McClung stated he was concerned he have any type of a contractual relationship with the applicant also., ,"G' "', Mr. Lehnhoff stated the City did not have4:r?'1~iremetit)hat the had to be the applicant, so from an administrative standpoitit'g~:?ncog~l'lg,ed them to see that on this application. He noted this was not an unustiaJ';oirp'ulnstance, and staff was looking at chanving this."';;> o - "~;,:~'IT?-' Julie Oliverius, 2029 Thorn Comt, stated all of the 10ts'al?pii"New Brighton Boulevard were long lots. She stated if they allowed a shared drivewaypthis would set a precedent She noted a cuI-de-sac would provide a single-acce~s, to New Brighton Boulevard also. . She stated Mr. Horitl'lVias only concerned about his,green space and not his neighbor's green space. Ivan Gilbelt agreed with Ms. Oliverius' comments, He indicated Mr. Horita had no concern for preseJ'Vi:rtg his green space he was disappointed he was not spoken to about,thi?J,dev01~pmeht,"i",:.: J(le Giannetti,20J3""fhomCourt, stated he was the most affected by this development Heindicated the ar~aJhroughjthis area was a deer nm and deer ran through t?is area cveryday. He statcditl1is would affect the wetland. He noted if all of the trees proposed to ber.e)lloved wereii.removed, this would rcmove his privacy and the filter for the wetland.'j,\Bte indicatedJhere \vas no need to remove the trees on the west side. Hc stated he was didjpPiJintecJyMr. Horita had not come to the neighbors to discuss this with them to work out ah)"'i;,pncerns. He indicated there were no specifics as to the types and sizes of homes bein~,built and this was a concern for him also. . He stated he had spoken with the Rice Creek Watershed District and the DNR about this who both indicated they did not know anything about this proposal. He expressed concern that this was going to be a private driveway and not a cul-de-sac. He asked how cmergency vehicles would access the driveway if there were cars parked in the driveway. Moose Giannetti, 2033 Thorn Court, stated they just bought their property this past winter and they were shocked to see the area behind them was going to be developed, She stated she would like to see the shed at the rear of the Jot gone, but she had the same .