My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 07-28-2003
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
CCP 07-28-2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:18:32 PM
Creation date
11/14/2006 2:36:33 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.
/
143
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 />. <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JULY 9, 2003 <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />Chair Sand questioned the zoning ordinance requirement regarding penn anent <br />encroachments into setbacks. The zoning ordinance states encroachments may extend <br />three feet into the required setback for decks and in no case the setback is to be no less <br />than six feet. He questioned the fact the existing deck is already encroaching more than <br />tlrree feet and now the applicant wants to make the encroachment worse. <br /> <br />Mr. Hellegers stated that was correct and that the house is 30-feet from the property line. <br />The existing deck is 12-feet from the property line and the applicant is requesting an <br />additional six-feet of encroachment. The situation was created by the builder of the home <br />by building the home so close to the east property line and the wooded area. The rear of <br />the property is abutted by 29-feet of tree cover and no cover is planned to be removed. <br />Staff considered moving deck to the west but there is a tuck under garage, which would <br />pose problems. The applicant wants to add a pergola to maintain the amenity of a deck so <br />close to the woods, but because of the mosquitoes, it needs to be enclosed. In effect, the <br />request increases the non-conforming area but grants the property owner more buildable <br />area. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ricke questioned if there would be any trees removed in this process. Mr. <br />Hellegers stated that would not be the case. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zimmerman asked if the 30-foot setback was established when the house <br />was built and if the deck was constructed at that time or later. Mr. Hellegers stated he <br />was unaware of any variance for the current deck and was not sure when it was <br />constructed. This could be verified by checking the building permit and he was not <br />certain of which zoning ordinance applied. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zimmennan commented that the Planning Commission is continually <br />running into items like this. If the original ordinance requirements are not known, it is <br />difficult to make decisions. <br /> <br />Mr. Hellegers replied that information is cross-referenced, but many files prior to 1980 <br />have been damaged or destroyed. There is no variance indicated for this property and staff <br />can review the building file for a deck permit. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ricke questioned if any other neighbors commented besides those in the <br />packet. Mr. Hellegers answered there were no further comments. <br /> <br />Commissioner Larson noted the front deck must have built at the same time as the house <br />due to the nature of cantilever. When the deck was built it was in violation and the <br />hardship was created by the original owner. He also noted that number five of the report <br />stated other properties have similar issues with but number one stated the circumstances <br />are unique to the property. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zimmerman questioned if there was anything in the park and trail <br />comprehensive plan that would cause park to move closer to this property. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.