CCP 05-13-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLAJ'..'NTNG COMMISSION - MAY I, 2002 DR Commissioner Zimmennan asked if the lot to the south was a conforming lot and the width of that lot. Mr. Parrish replied the lot was conforming and the width was 95 feet. . Commissioner Zimmennan stated when they had looked at a subdivision proposal a couple of months ago there was a concern with the road having sufficient access for emergency vehicles. Mr. Parrish replied project had been reviewed by the Fire Department and they had no concems regarding the access. Scott Hanson, stated he opposed this proposal because it put the road right along his back lot line. He expressed concern that that was already a low-lying area and had drainage issues. He also expressed concern about the snow and debris that would get swept off of the road, and the excess getting swept into his yard. He stated when they purchased their lot, it was with the understanding that there was a nursery and Christmas tree sales on that lot, but he was disappointed that there was now going to be a road. He expressed concem about his value and enjoyment of his property. Joanne Pastorius, opposed this proposal due to safety issues and having an access onto Hamline Avenue. She indicated there was no natural frontage to this home. She stated this home would be looking into their back yards. She expressed concern about drainage also. Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. Chair Sand asked what the requirements were with respect to setback for a driveway for a lot. Mr. Parrish replied they were actually able to go to the property line with a driveway. . Chair Sand asked if the elevations proposed for constructing the driveway would raise the existing elevations, or would they be kept or lowered. The City Engineer, Nick Landwer, replied they would review any drainage plans before approval. Chair Sand asked ifthe City Engineer been out to the site. Mr. Landwer replied he had not. Chair Sand indicated this was apparently a lower area that remained wet. He requested any review take into account any potential runoff and exacerbation of any drainage problems. He asked if any drainage problem was made worse, would this be a rejection of the request. Mr. Parrish replied if there was a potential for drainage issues, a building permit would not be issued. Commissioner Zimmerman asked what was required for access for a lot such as this. Mr. Parrish replied the requirement was street frontage to have access to a public street. In this instance, there was only a small access to a public street for the strip of land going back to the property. He stated the standard street requirement was 50-60 feet. He indicated this request wanted a private access variance to allow access to Parcel B. He stated this was not done with great regularity within the community; typically this was done around the lakes. He noted this was not standard, but it was not unusual either. . Commissioner Zimmerman asked if the purpose of this was to guarantee the lot to the south would not be made unbuildable. Mr. Parrish replied that was a part of the intention.