My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 03-13-2000
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
CCP 03-13-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:15:59 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 1:23:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
114
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 1,2000 <br /> <br />DRAFT <br /> <br />14 <br /> <br />Chair Erickson noted that by removing it from the public process and allowing staff <br />consideration, the neighbors are not notified and it is more of a building permit process. He <br />noted that if notification was mailed out, it would be difficult for staff to determine how to <br />handle obj ections. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Ms. Randall stated that with variances, only the abutting property owners are notified. She noted <br />that with the City of Rose vi lie, the application is presented to a Design Review Committee and, <br />if approved, then goes to their Council as a consent agenda consideration. Ms. Randall <br />commented on the concern with a polling process depending on who is providing the <br />information. She stated if the information to neighbors is provided by neighbors, then it may not <br />be as accurate as if provided by the City. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand noted that with this process, 30 of the applications contained on the schedule <br />provided by staff would not have been approved. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rye stated he wished it would have addressed more than 30. He noted that by <br />establishing criteria, it will not be that onerous. He suggested a percentage requirement be <br />established. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand noted that in terms of workload, it is still a Council consideration on the <br />consent agenda and increases staff work since they would be involved with more than the <br />application process. He noted this is the process for the Planning Commission and why they <br />were created. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Commissioner Rye stated he does not know that it would take more staff time but agreed that <br />may take about the same amount of time. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand noted the Hopkins model. Ms. Randall stated it only allows for a side yard <br />consideration but she added all four of the setbacks to the draft ordinance in case the Planning <br />Commission wanted to consider that option. She noted the need for the Planning Commission to <br />determine minimum setback distances so parameters are provided within the ordinance language. <br />Ms. Randall stated Roseville went with this procedure to encourage older bungalow owners to do <br />front elevation remodeling because the new process made it easier for those homeowners. <br /> <br />Chair Erickson stated that reasoning is different than the consideration in Arden Hills. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rye asked what staff preference is. Ms. Randall stated when it is a permitted <br />encroachment, it is a smoother process because they are not submitting a lot of documents. She <br />advised that the three foot encroachment with cantilevered structures goes on all the time and <br />makes the process more smooth since it is handled by the building official. However, the <br />proposed ordinance amendment could "open the door" to some applications the Planning <br />Commission does not want approved. <br /> <br />Chair Erickson asked how this process would impact the applications considered tonight. Ms. <br />Randall stated all applications would have had to come before the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Chair Erickson asked about a house that is three feet from the property line and if that would <br />always be an acceptable situation. He pointed out that it is probably not always acceptable <br />depending on what is on the other side of the property line. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.