CCP 06-26-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 7, 2000 4 . Commissioner Galatowitsch asked if the applicant would like a continuation to redraft the plans for additional consideration. Mr. Mertensotto stated he was not interested in changing the plans . and the application would be dropped if not approved as is, He explained that he has tried to revise this plan and he is still not meeting the wishes of the Commission. Chair Erickson reiterated an addition would be feasible on this site if the applicant was willing to minimize the encroachment concerns. Commissioner Sand concurred and noted the first sketch proposed to the Commission was compliant and he would support a redraft of the original plan. Commissioner Baker moved, seconded by Commissioner Sand to recommend denial of Planning Case #00-14, a comer side yard setback variance (12 feet where 40 is required) for a porch addition, Chuck Mertensotto, 3491 Lake Johanna Boulevard, based on the fact the Commission feels there are alternative plans that could meet the Ordinance, reduce the proposed encroachment, and that the proposed addition does not improve the existing non-conformity. The motion carried unanimously (4-1 Duchenes opposed). This Planning Case will be reviewed at the Monday, June 26, 2000, City Council meeting. PLANNING CASE #OO-17b - WELSH COMPANIES -1987 AND 1887 GATEWAY BOULEVARD - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT City Planner Chaput explained that the applicant requests approval to modify the existing .. Planned Unit Development to allow for staff approval of the list of items outlined in the staff ..- memo for both 1987 and 1887 Gateway Boulevard. The owner has found it difficult to sign tenants who need modifications to the exterior of the building due to the two-month PUD amendment process. They would like to streamline this, allowing staff to approve several of the more common modification requests. The Planning Commission heard this request at the April 5, 2000, Planning Commission meeting. At that time, the request was tabled pending further information from the applicant. The requested information had not been provided for the May meeting. The applicant's sixty days were extended and notice was sent that this application would come before the Planning Commission at their June meeting, At this time, the applicant was to submit a letter, stating her requests. The letter, although submitted at a late date, was before the Planning Commission for discussion. The City of Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance, Section VIII, F, 3 states, "Any structural alteration, enlargement or intensification, change in site plan, or similar change not specially permitted, shall require City action and all procedures shall apply as if a new applicant were being requested; provided, however, that when such changes are deemed to be insignificant by the zoning administrator, the requirements of a public hearing may be waived." City Planner Chaput reviewed the requests previously considered regarding this development as detailed in the Staff report. She indicated staff does have some ability to approve insignificant changes. However, in the past, staff has felt uncomfortable with several of the requested modifications. Staff would reserve the right to attach conditions as needed or request a formal application with public hearing, if warranted, .