4-7-10 Regular PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 7, 2010 2 PLANNING CASES A.Planning Case 09-022; Variance; 1563 Edgewater Avenue; Mr. and Mrs. Ranallo – Not a Public Hearing City Planner Meagan Beekman reported the applicants are requesting a variance to construct a new home at the property located at 1563 Edgewater Avenue. The structure would encroach 5.11 feet into the east yard setback. All other setback requirements would be met. She then provided background information and said that Staff offers the following seventeen findings of fact for review: General Findings: 1.The lot size meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning District. 2.The lot meets the depth requirements for the R-1 Zoning District. 3.The lot is only 70 feet wide which does not meet the 95 foot width requirement for the R-1 Zoning District. 4.The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home and construct a new home in its place. 5.The existing home currently encroaches into both side yard setbacks. 6.The proposed home would increase the setback on the west side of the property from 7.9 feet to ten feet, bringing it into conformance with the current Code. The front and lakeside setbacks would meet the minimum requirements of the Code. 7.The proposed home would encroach 5.1 feet into the required 15-foot side yard setback to the east. 8.The proposed structure coverage meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning District. 9.The proposed minimum landscape area meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning District. 10.The proposed home would not exceed 35 feet in height. 11.The proposed garage is outside of the 100-year flood plain, wetlands, and easements. 12.There is no proposed tree removal for this project. Variance Findings: 13.Single-family homes are a reasonable use within the R-1 Zoning District because they are permitted within the Zoning Code. 14.The property is unique in the City due to the narrowness of the lot and steep topography to the north. 15.The circumstances of the property were not created by the landowner because the lost was platted prior to their taking ownership. 16.The proposed east side yard setback encroachment would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood because most of the homes in this area are nonconforming in terms of side yard setbacks and the west side yard setback would be increased to meet the requirements of the Code. 17.The construction and location of the home is not based on economic considerations alone, because tree preservation, distance to the lake, location of neighboring properties, and setback considerations were the primary reason for the proposed layout and location of the home.