CCP 08-25-2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'" -". 'r' 1''- t e e - C) i-'~) I . 3. Could the property iu question be put to a reasonable use without the granting of the variance? No. The applicant has indicated that due to health concerns, it is necessary that the applicant place most activities on the main level. The property would likely still be a reasonable use as if the inhabitants did not need the activities on the main level due to health concerns. However, the applicant is trying to make the property work for their current and future needs and the changes to the floor plan will need to be made so that the applicants can remain in this property for the foreseeable future. 4. Was the hardship created by the owner? No, The hardship is the result of years of erosiou on the shoreline of Lake Johanna which have washed away several feet of shoreline at the southwest corner of the property and reduced the developable area of the applicant's property. The hardship is also due to the applicant's health concerns which have necessitated consolidating activities on the main levef of the house. 5, Would grauting the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No, If the variance was granted the addition to the house and deck would be approximately 45 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHM) and the stairway to the deck would be 41 feet from the OHM. The addition would not require the removal of any trees and the foliage would remain between the structure and the shoreline. Neighboring properties should not be adversely affected. Deadline for Aeencv Actious The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on July 8, 2003. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statue, the city must act on this request by September 7, 2003 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 day review period. The city may with the petitioner's consent extend the review period beyond the 120 days. PC #03-19- PC Report 08/06103 - Page 5 or6