Laserfiche WebLink
NEW BUSINESS –8B <br />has reviewed the through-lot criteria and has determined that arear yard setback of thirty <br />(30) feet from Fairview Avenue and a ten (10) foot side yard setback from the southern <br />property line are appropriate for accessory structures located within the rear yard.The thirty <br />(30) foot setback designation has beenbased on the current setback of the principalstructure <br />and the location of other principaland accessory structures on adjacent lotsin the immediate <br />vicinity. <br />Variance Evaluation Criteria <br />On May 5, 2011, the Governor signed into law new variance legislation that changed the review <br />criteria City’s must use when evaluating variance requests. The new law renames the municipal <br />variance standard from “undue hardship” to “practical difficulties,” but otherwise retains the <br />familiar three-factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential character. Also <br />included is a sentence new to city variance authority that was already in the county statutes: <br />“Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and <br />intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive <br />plan”. <br />Therefore, in evaluating variance requests under the new law, in order to find a practical <br />difficulty, cities should adopt findings addressing the following questions: <br />Is the variance in harmony withthe purposes and intent of the ordinance? <br />Is the variance consistent withthe comprehensive plan? <br />Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? <br />Are there unique circumstancesto the property not created by the landowner? <br />Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential characterof the locality? <br />As was the case before the new legislation took effect, economic considerations alone cannot <br />constitute a practical difficulty. Furthermore, the new law clarifies that conditions may be <br />imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to and bear a rough <br />proportionality to the impact created by the variance. <br />Findings of Fact <br />The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their July 9, 2014, meeting and have <br />offered the following findings of fact for your consideration: <br />General Findings <br />1.The property is in the R-2Single & Two Family Residential Zoning District. <br />City of Arden Hills <br />City Council Meeting for July 28, 2014 <br />P:\\Planning\\Planning Cases\\2014\\PC 14-017 -Variance 3441 Lake Johanna Boulevard\\Memo_Reports_14-017 <br />59 <br />Page of <br />