My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 10-30-2006 (2)
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
CCP 10-30-2006 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:29:25 PM
Creation date
2/16/2007 10:49:10 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
170
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 /> ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 10,2006 7 <br /> . Councilmember Grant stated the City created a road in front of the property, which was <br /> substandard to the 32-foot road, and thereby the City infringed upon this. He noted the road <br /> design was not created by the resident. This also did not change the character of the <br /> neighborhood given the number of dual driveways. <br /> Councilmember Holden stated they could make them cover the crushed rock on the second dual <br /> access point with sod, so considering the angle of the property and that at any point in time, if <br /> they did change this, it would change the character of the neighborhood, she believed this was a <br /> reasonable use for the property. <br /> Councilmember Larson stated the width of the road was consistent with the neighborhood and <br /> he did not believe they should use that as an argument as the need for a variance. He expressed <br /> concern about setting a precedent and he did not believe this was a good justification. <br /> The motion carried (3-1) (Councilmember Larson opposed). <br /> Councilmember Grant stated the residents had a reasonable assumption that the crushed rock <br /> driveway was approved and as such it should be allowed to continue. He noted the only reason <br /> this was discovered was because the City had improved the street. <br /> Mayor Aplikowski stated she was stmggling with allowing cmshed rock to remain and she <br /> would like to add whenever this driveway was replaced that it be replaced with a City approved <br /> . driveway surface. <br /> Councilmember Holden stated with all of the water runoff, why they would not allow this. She <br /> noted a crushed rock driveway could be maintained nicely. <br /> Mayor Aplikowski stated she was inclined to say this driveway was okay because it was <br /> maintained, but when this driveway needed to be replaced she would want it to be replaced with <br /> a City approved surface. <br /> Councilmember I.,arson stated they had a Code and if Council was not comfortable with the <br /> Code they should change the Code and not issue variances. He stated if a variance was going to <br /> be issued, they needed to have justification as to why they were going to do that. He believed <br /> there was a correct way to do this and this was not the correct way. <br /> Mr. Lehnhoff asked if the City Council would like to table this item and consider changing the <br /> existing Ordinance. Mr. Filla responded unless the Council wanted to change the Code, there <br /> was no reason to table this. <br /> Councilmember Holden stated she was not inclined to table this. She believed the applicants <br /> had moved forward with a crushed rock driveway in good faith because they believed it had been <br /> approved by the City. <br /> . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.