CCP 04-24-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - ARIL 5, 2006 {" ..., f.... ['} ,t J~ The existing covered porch ordinance does not disting~i~~' '~c;!~:l developed, rcdeveloped, or vacant lots. Currently, any residential lot may have a front porch as close as 30 feet to the front lot line. 6 . The question regarding glass was brought up by the Building Official for clarification. He recommended the Commission approve the zoning ordinance amendment subject to resolving the three discussion points. Commissioner McClung stated he believed this was a much better proposal than what they had looked at in the past and he liked the way it has been crafted. In terms of the three discussion points, he would be in favor of the first two and in terms of glass being a solid surface, he did not want to see glass included in the 35 percent because hc did not want three-season porches added to the front of homes. Commissioner Thompson stated she agreed with Commissioner McClung and agreed glass would be a difficult thing to manage. In addition, she believed the concept of a porch was supposed to be open air. She stated for tear downs, they were allowed to be rcbuilt on the same footprint, but would that included the porch also. Mr. Lehnhoff stated he did not sce anything in the Zoning Ordinance where a tear down could be built on the same footprint, howevcr state law did allow rebuilds on the exact same footprint and in his opinion this would include a porch. Commissioner Modesette stated she agreed with thc prcvious comments. She indicated . however, if someone wanted to add glass to thc bottom portion and it did not exceed 35 percent, she did not have a problem with that. Commissioner Bezdicek stated uniformity was important and he believed the Ordinance should apply to existing structures, as well as future developments. With respect to the glass, he did not want to see glass on the porches. Acting Chair Larson statcd he agreed with item 3 and with respect to items I and 2, he believed a front porch should be available to everyone and if the main structure is set back 40 feet, they should still be allowed to have a front porch closer than 40 feet. Commissioner McClung agreed uniformity was important and setback from the principal structure should be at the 40 foot mark and allow residents to take the same advantage that cveryone elsc had with respect to the front porch. He noted they would need to modify the language ofthc Ordinance. Acting Chair Larson opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Acting Chair Larson invited anyone for or against the request to comc forward and make comment. There wcre no commcnts made. .