My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PCAgenda_04Sep28
FalconHeights
>
Committees and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
200x
>
2004
>
PCAgenda_04Sep28
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/22/2009 9:11:06 AM
Creation date
7/8/2009 9:24:28 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
City of Falcon Heights <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />• August 24, 2004 <br />PRESENT: Commissioners Harris, Heideman, Lageson, Maher, Ryan, Tracy, Council Member <br />Lindstrom. Also present was Staff Liaison Deb Jones. <br />ABSENT: Lukermann, DeLeo, Ziebarth <br />The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Harris at 7:03 p.m. The minutes of the June 22, <br />2004, meeting were approved. <br />LOT COVERAGE VARIANCE AT 1885 ASBURY <br />Preliminary to the public hearing, Staff Liaison Jones presented the staff report on the variance <br />application. Applicant sought a variance to build an addition on his house that would bring his <br />property over the legal limit for lot coverage given in Section 9-2.05, subd. 2d of the City Code. The <br />property is 11,622 square feet, for which the code allows a maximum of 30% or 3,487 square feet. <br />The existing coverage is 3,900 square feet, or 413 more than allowed. The applicant would remove <br />some existing pavement and a shed and build a 624 square foot bedroom addition that would be a net <br />increase of 234 square feet, or a total of 647 more than allowed by the ordinance. <br />Jones pointed out that this residence is one of the properties on the west side of Asbury and east side <br />of Snelling that are unusually wide and shallow. This configuration imposes unusual constraints on <br />the buildable area of each lot, and in fact, most of the homes are non-conforming with respect to <br />• setback. Similar additions have been allowed on other homes on these lots, although those took place <br />before the current lot coverage limits came into effect. The owner has two other options (1) removing <br />an existing patio, which would be the loss of an important outdoor amenity, or (2) adding a second <br />story -which would be significantly more costly. Staff did not find that the variance would have any <br />negative or harmful effect on surrounding properties or public spaces or that the expanded home <br />would be out of line with the other properties on the west side of Asbury. Staff did find that the <br />proposed addition is a reasonable amenity and would probably enhance the value of the property . No <br />neighbor contacted the City prior to the hearing to express any opinion. To summarize the findings, <br />Staff did not find sufficient reason to deny the variance and recommended approval. <br />The public hearing was opened by the Chair. The only persons in attendance were the property <br />owner, Steven Genz, and his architect Jeff Hogsted of JDH Designs. Mr. Genz spoke to the <br />Commission about his proposed plan and answered Commissioner questions. Commissioner Lageson <br />offered the suggestion that plumbing not be located in the outside north wall, which was taken to <br />heart by the designer. Mr. Hogsted also spoke briefly about the design and answered questions. <br />There being no one else who wished to speak, the Chair closed the hearing. Tracy moved, Lageson <br />seconded, that the Commission recommend approval of the variance. <br />The ensuing discussion centered on the lot coverage issue and whether the variance should be granted <br />when there is an option (removing the patio) that would make a variance unnecessary. <br />Commissioner Ryan said he is struggling over this point, although he appreciated the applicant <br />making an effort to eliminate other pavements and the shed. The same discomfort was shared by <br />other Commissioners, in view of the fact that the Commission spent so much working on lot coverage <br />• in 2002. In the end, the motion to recommend approval passed, 4 in favor, 2 opposed. <br />City of Falcon Heights -Planning Commission Meeting of August 24, 2004 -Page 1 of 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.