CCP 09-13-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 DRAFT 8 The applicant currently has a one car tuck-under garage 15 feet by 24 feet (360 square feet). The applicant was proposing a 9 foot 6 inch by 24 foot (228 square feet) garage addition, thereby e providing the applicant with a 24 foot 6 inch by 24 foot (588 square foot) attached garage. Secondly, the applicant was requesting a 9 foot 6 inch by 24 foot (228 square foot) addition to increase the bedroom space above the garage. The applicant has evaluated other locations for the garage and home addition; however, this was the only location they felt would work with the existing home. A new garage would fit on the east side of the home; however, there is a steep slope from the street and an existing deck. Staff had found that the City has made the findings in numerous variance requests that the provisions of a two car garage on a property provides for a reasonable use of that property. The home already has two standard bedrooms. The home could be expanded four feet six inches without needing a variance. This would allow for the two bedrooms to be expanded. The bedroom to the north could also be expanded out the back of the home. Although these spaces may not be as large as the applicant desires, they do provide for a reasonable use of the property in relation to other homes in the City. The proposed garage addition does not provide for more room than a standard two car garage. The house addition could be reduced on the west side and expanded without a variance to the north. e Ms. Randall advised that staff recommended approval of Planning Case 99-14, side yard setback variance (5 feet proposed, when 10 feet is required) for an attached garage based on the "Findings - Side Yard Setback Variance" section of the staff report dated September 1, 1999, subject to the condition that the second level house addition only be constructed in the buildable area and not extend into the 10 foot setback area. If the Planning Commission makes a recommendation on this Planning Case, then it would be heard at the Monday, September 13, 1999, regular meeting of the City Council. Chair Erickson stated that two letters had been received by the City in support of the proposal. Commissioner Sand requested clarification of the intent of staff s statement that the second level house addition only be constructed within the buildable area and not extend into the 10 foot setback area. He asked if the concern was for the roof overhang extending into the setback area. It did not appear to him that the house walls themselves would extend into the setback area. Ms. Randall explained that staff was proposing that the second level addition only extend to the 10 foot setback line which would still allow the overhang. However, the second level wall would not line up with the garage. Commissioner Sand asked how much the house would extend to the west with staffs recommendation. Ms. Randall stated that the house could extend four and one-half feet and still maintain a 10 foot setback. Commissioner Sand confirmed that this was approximately half of what the applicant was proposing. Ms. Randall stated this was true.. . Mr. Timothy Stowman, 1191 Carlson Drive, stated that one situation he had not discuss with staff was that the properties to his rear and east are at least four feet above the grade of his