CCP 03-13-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

f. e . . ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH I, 2000 DRAFT o ~ Chair Erickson noted staff rational for denial was based on the fact that a third stall could be added without a variance. Ms. Randall stated that is correct. Commissioner Sand stated that based on past experience it is almost assumed that everyone is entitled to a three car garage. Unfortunately, it almost has to be done at the time the home is built because unless you can show the lot creates more hardship than this case; no one has the right to a three car garage. He noted the workspace is about 128 square feet (8' x 16') but there are other configurations that could accomplish the same square footage, such as extending toward the side lot line, without violating any setback standards. Commissioner Sand stated that he believes there are other options that could be explored to accomplish a workshop without the need for a variance. Because of that, he indicated he would not vote in support of this request. Commissioner Nelson clarified that Chair Erickson's suggestion was to build a square shaped expansion toward the side lot line, not an angled wall configuration. Mr. Erickson stated his second option to construct a 19' by 24' third stall is possible but not as preferable. Chair Erickson suggested he explore that option and stated that he does not believe such a configuration would result in additional construction costs. Commissioner Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend denial of Planning Case #00-12, Rear Yard Variance (20 feet proposed when 30 feet is required) for a garage addition based on the "Findings - Rear Yard Setback Variance" as contained in the Staffreport dated March 1, 2000. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). This Planning Case will be reviewed at the Monday, March 13, 2000, City Council meeting. PLANNING CASE #00-13 - JULIE SCHUMACHER -1932 WEST COUNTY ROAD E- SPECIAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING Chair Erickson confirmed that the Planning Case was announced in the February 16, 2000 publication ofthe Bulletin and opened the pnblic hearing at 7:48 p.m. Ms. Randall explained that the applicant was requesting approval of a Special Use Permit (Class II Home Occupation) for a personal training studio in a single family lot zoned R-2. The home is located at 1932 West County Road E and was remodeled in 1994 to include a workshop area behind the existing two car garage. The applicant has a purchase agreement on the home and would like to use the workshop area for a training studio. Staff is unaware of any existing Special Use Permits for home occupations. The City has several business permitted as a Class 1 Home Occupation. Ms. Randall reviewed the conditions required for approval of a Class II Home Occupation as contained in Zoning Ordinance Section VI, B, 3, a, which states home occupations are allowed as either accessory uses or special uses depending on the characteristics of the operation. Ms. Randall reviewed Zoning Ordinance Section VI, B, 3, c which states Class II Special Accessory Home Occupations may be allowed by Special Use Permit if they meet the conditions stipulated for all Home Occupations and the following conditions: 1. The primary business activity shall be conducted by an occupant of the residence;