06-17-16-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for June 27, 2016 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2016\PC 16-015 - 1494 Keithson Drive - Variance\Memos_Reports_16-015 Page 3 of 5 intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan.” Therefore, in evaluating variance requests under the new law, in order to find a practical difficulty, cities should adopt findings addressing the following questions: • Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? • Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan? • Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? • Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner? • Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? As was the case before the new legislation took effect, economic considerations alone cannot constitute a practical difficulty. Furthermore, the new law clarifies that conditions may be imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 16-015 at their regular meeting on June 8, 2016. Draft minutes from the meeting are included in Attachment H. The Planning Commission offers the following findings of fact for consideration: General Findings: 1. The property at 1494 Keithson Drive is located in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. 2. The lot is in conformance with the minimum lot size and dimensions for the R-1 District. 3. The existing conditions on the property are in conformance with the setback and structure and lot coverage requirements for properties in the R-1 District. 4. The proposed porch addition would encroach 3 feet – 6 inches into the rear yard setback creating a setback of 26 feet – 6inches from the rear property line. The minimum rear yard setback in the R-1 District is 30 feet. The proposed porch addition would meet all other setback requirements for the R-1 District. 5. The proposed deck is in conformance with the Zoning Code as Section 1325.03, Subd. 2 (A) permits decks to extend six feet into the rear yard setback as long as the encroachment is not closer than six feet from the rear lot line. The proposed deck would be setback 26 feet – 6 inches from the rear property line. 6. All other aspects of the proposed porch and deck addition are in conformance with the Zoning Code requirements for the R-1 District. 7. The proposed addition would not encroach on any flood plains, wetlands, or easements. 8. The proposed addition is not expected to impact any significant trees on the property.