Laserfiche WebLink
City of Arden Hills <br />Planning Commission Meeting for February 5th, 2020 <br />P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-020 - 3159 Shoreline Lane - VA <br />Page 3 of 6 <br />relevant state law. Neighborhood opinion alone is not a valid basis for granting or denying a <br />variance request. While the Planning Commission may feel their decision should reflect the overall <br />will of the residents, the task in considering a variance request is limited to evaluating how the <br />variance application meets the statutory practical difficulties factors. Residents can often provide <br />important facts that may help in addressing these factors, however, unsubstantiated opinions and <br />reactions to a request do not form a legitimate basis for a variance decision. <br />The Planning Commission may impose conditions when granting variances as long as the <br />conditions are directly related and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the <br />variance. For instance, if a variance is granted to exceed the rear setback limit, any conditions <br />attached should presumably relate to mitigating the effect of the encroachment. <br />3.Variance Requirements – Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 <br />The Applicant requests a variance to construct a new deck on the rear of the residential dwelling <br />that would encroach into the rear yard setback by an additional five feet, six inches (5’ 6”), due to <br />the nature of the shoreline of Lake Josephine which abuts the rear of the property. The Planning <br />Commission will need to make a determination utilizing the following variance findings and <br />criteria on whether there are practical difficulties with complying with the zoning regulations. If <br />the applicant does not meet all the factors of the statutory test, then a variance should not be <br />granted. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and <br />intent of the ordinance. <br />1. Purpose and Intent. The variance request shall comply with the purpose and intent of the <br />provisions of the City’s Zoning Regulations and with the policies of the City’s Comprehensive <br />Plan. <br />Staff finds the variance request for 3159 Shoreline Lane would comply with the purpose and <br />intent of the R-2 Zoning District and with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan. <br />2. Practical Difficulties. The Applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical <br />difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term <br />“Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: <br />a.Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner <br />not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. <br />Staff finds that a detached home with a deck is a reasonable use of the Subject Property in <br />the R-2 Zoning District. <br />b.Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to <br />the property not created by the landowner. <br />According to the Applicants’ application, they are requesting a larger deck that <br />encroaches on the rear yard setback because 1) since the time of the home's construction, <br />conditions have changed and the setback restrictions and shoreline including changing <br />high watermark present a hardship 2) the current code will not allow for a reasonable <br />size deck to be constructed, similar to comparable properties on the lake, so the proposed