My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 07-29-2002
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
CCP 07-29-2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:17:18 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 4:04:47 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.
/
182
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 />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JULY 17,2002 <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />CASE #02-15 - FRED AND SYLVIA BERNDT, 1575 EDGEWATER AVENUE, <br />SPECIAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING <br /> <br />Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7:44 p.m. <br /> <br />Staff reviewed their report dated July 11, 2002. Staff stated the City had not processed a <br />Special Use Permit for this type of structure. Staff outlined general options for approval <br />or denial of the application as opposcd to providing a formal recommendation. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ricke inquired about the regulation regarding permitting only one <br />structure on the property. Mr. Parrish replied thcy were allowed only one principal <br />structure on a property, but a boathouse was considered an accessory structure, such as a <br />shed. <br /> <br />Chair Sand asked how the three-foot requirement on the shoreline related to the City <br />Zoning Ordinance regarding lakeshore setbacks. Mr. Parrish replied that was for a <br />primary structure, not an accessory structure. <br /> <br />Commissioner Bezdicek asked for clarification regarding new structures not allowed to <br />be built on the shore. Mr. Parrish replied he did not know the history of the shoreline <br />Ordinance, but when the City recodified the Ordinances, this Ordinance was essentially <br />the same. He stated he did not know of any requirement that allowed only one structure <br />on lakefront property. <br /> <br />Commissioner Bezdicek asked when the DNR stopped regulating this kind of activity. <br />Mr. Parrish replied he did not have that information. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ricke asked for a definition of a boathouse. Mr. Parrish replied it was a <br />structure for the house of a boat and miscellaneous items. <br /> <br />Fred Berndt, applicant, stated he had lived in the home for 20 years. He indicated they <br />could not add onto the home and they needed additional storage. He stated they were <br />planning on buying a boat. He indicated the proposed boat house would look nice. <br /> <br />Steve Nelson, 3475 Siems Court, stated when they built in 1985, they were told they <br />could only have one permanent structure on the property and they could not put any <br />structure within 75 feet of the lake. He stated if they would have been allowed to put <br />build a boathouse, he would have done that for storage of his boat. He stated boathouses <br />were unsightly and blocked the view of the lake. He indicated other residents would put <br />boathouses in if they could. He objected to the two stories on the proposed boathouse. He <br />asked they put a limitation on the Special Use Permit. He indicated he understood that <br />structures could be built within 50 feet of the lakeshore, so Mr. Berndt could add onto his <br />home ifhe was 75 feet from the lakeshore. <br /> <br />Chair Sand askcd who told him they could not build within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Mr. <br />Nelson replied the City had informed him that a boathouse was not allowed because it <br />would be a pcrmanent structure, which was against DNR regulations and the City had <br />adopted the DNR regulations. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.