Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 13,1999 <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />addition to reach the setback limits on the property to the west. Additionally, the lot to the west <br />was much wider than the applicant's. <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone expressed concern for the request and suggested that the proper solution <br />would be for the applicant to purchase five feet of land from the property to the west. He agreed <br />that the house had been built according to the slope and was made to fit properly with the <br />contours of the property. He did understand staffs preference that the bulk of the home not be <br />right on the property line, He felt that the proposed garage was acceptable but was not certain <br />about the house addition. He noted that most other homes in the area were built more towards <br />center of the lots. <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski asked if the proposed house addition would be possible ifthe City <br />Council were to take the stand that the applicant must acquire land from the neighbor to the west. <br />Ms. Randall stated that, if the neighbor were willing to sell a portion of their land, the addition <br />would be possible. The applicant would have to request a minor subdivision, Mayor Probst <br />confirmed that a variance would not be required for this scenario. Ms, Randall stated tllat this <br />was correct. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem asked if this option had been discussed with the applicant. Ms. Randall <br />stated that staff had briefly discussed this option with the applicant, however, the applicant had <br />felt that a variance would be easier. She was not sure what discussions the applicant may have <br />had with the neighbor regarding this possibility. Councilmember Rem asked ifit had been <br />presented to the applicant that the City would prefer a land acquisition rather than variance. Ms. <br />Randall stated that the idea had been discussed as an option, <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson asked if either of the two letters received by the Planning Commission <br />had been from adjacent neighbors. Ms. Randall stated that the property owner to the west had <br />been prcsent at the Planning Commission meeting alld was in full support of the request. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson asked if the applicant had oflered reasons for not adding onto the other <br />side of the house. Ms, Randall stated that there was a fairly new deck on the east side of the <br />home, Additionally, the applicant was looking for additional bedroom space and the east end of <br />the home contains the kitchen and dining room areas. It would not flow well with the interior <br />layout to add a bedroom off the kitchen. <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone asked, if the Council were to consider staffs original recommendation, <br />would it be possible to add on to the rear ofthe home, Ms, Randall stated that it would be <br />possible to expand to the north without a variance, She indicated that the applicant had <br />expressed concern for the drainage in this area, The homes to the north of the applicant are <br />higher and the drainage does flow down towards the applicant's home, In order to expand to the <br />north, the applicant would be required to re-grade the property, Ms. Randall noted that the <br />applicant would be allowed to expand four and one-half feet to the west without a variance. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst expressed his support of the request. He felt that the addition was the logical area <br />for the bedroom expansion. He was not sure that allowing the garage and not the house addition <br />would serve the neighborhood, He was persuaded to support the request because the home to the <br />