My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 07-10-2000
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
CCP 07-10-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:16:08 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 1:24:59 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.
/
78
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 CITY COUNCIL - June 26, 2000 <br /> <br />''<;',,".1 <br />~:_j.; '. ~ '-.'\: i4 5 <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />added she is not against what he is offering and if the roadway came close to the structure in <br />e future, it could be dealt with at that time. She stated she is in favor of the proposal. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem stated she agrees with Councilmember Aplikowski that the house would be <br />improved by the addition and it makes sense to allow the changes to take place. She added that <br />the existing foundations are above grade and are solid. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated he is in favor of the applicant's plans. He added Mr. Mertensotto <br />wants to improve the property and has produced a few alternatives. He noted the house was in <br />that location prior to the street being laid, and that makes the property nonconforming. He asked <br />whether removal of the proposed structure could be made conditional upon the widening of the <br />roadway. <br /> <br />Ms. Chaput stated that once the addition is approved it is permitted to stay there until it is ripped <br />down or destroyed as it is nonconforming and can not be reconstructed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson expressed his support of the applicant's plans. He stated the house is in <br />a prominent position in the city and any improvement is welcome given the condition of the <br />house. He added that it is located across from a park that the County is extensively redeveloping. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson noted that the proposed improvements will be constructed on existing <br />footings, and will be constructed so as to be easily removed, if necessary. He stated that the lot's <br />unique circumstances warrant a variance in this case. He reiterated his support of the request. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst asked whether landscaping could be requested as a condition of approval. Mr. <br />Lynch stated that is permissible. Mayor Probst expressed concem that a precedent might be set <br />if approval was granted when no hardship was demonstrated. He stated a combination of the <br />proposed improvements and additional landscaping might make a valuable distinction from other <br />neighborhoods. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated he is prepared to support the request. He added that if the applicant is <br />willing to accept conditions with regard to additional landscaping, there might be a way to <br />approve without creating a precedent. <br /> <br />Mr. Lynch stated it is permissible for the Council to add conditions as they see fit. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem stated the applicant should be present to address the conditions. Mayor <br />Probst agreed that would be fair. Councilmember Rem stated the addition is proposed over <br />existing and visible foundations, which is more applicable than an addition proposed where there <br />has been nothing in the past. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated this is an historic house in the city which creates some additional interest in <br /> <br />the case. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked where additional screening would be recommended. Mayor Probst <br />stated the garages behind the home tend to be visible from the roadway. Councilmember Grant <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.