CCP 07-12-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 2, 2004 4 . Commissioner Ricke expressed concern about hardship number 3 and setting precedent in this case. She asked if the City should grant a variance due to family size. . Commissioner Larson noted it appeared that there was a reasonable use for the property because it has been functioning as a reasonable use as a single-family home for many years. Chair Sand stated he did not know how they could properly address items I, 3 and 5 without knowing what exists on properties A and Q, Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the variance to come forward and make comment. Mark and Julie Arend, 2272 Arie! Street, North St. Paul, applicants, stated house Q had an address on Dunlap and not Cannon. He understood that the size of their family was not a good way to define a hardship, but they were seeking the variance because this house had a lot of good things going for it and it was in an area they wanted to be in. He stated they knew there was a chance this variance would not be approved, but they figured it was worth pursuing. Commissioner Ricke thanked the applicants for the thoroughness oftheir application. Mr. Arend presented a petition signed by five of the closest neighbors who had no . objection to this variance. He stated he had recently found out from one of the neighbors that until ten years ago Dunlap stopped at the south border and it did not go to half of the properties it did now. He noted there was a gravel drive at that time. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if applicant knew the difference in a setback variance if they chose option C instead of option A. Mr. Arend replied with option C they would need a 21-foot variance instead of a 24-foot variance. Commissioner Ricke asked if they would approve tabling this for 30 days for further information on the precedent concerns. Mr. Arend replied they had purchased this house and sold their other house, but they left a three-month overlap of time where they owned both houses to enable them to improve this property, but they would agree to a continuance ifit would facilitate this moving forward. Chair Sand requested information as to what the setback variance would be with option C. He stated if the third garage stall were taken off the garage, he might be more inclined to approve this, He asked if a third car garage was an important part of this request. Mr. Arend replied they would prefer a three-car garage, but noted they would only be taking off a small portion with respect to the setback. Commissioner Zimmerman noted they could also consider having the third stall to the east of the mudroom, . Commissioner Ricke asked if the proposed garage was a standard depth. Mr. Arend replied it was a little deeper than a standard size garage.