Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—AUGUST 10, 2020 4 <br /> property line. The propose deck requested would have encroached an additional twelve (12) feet <br /> into the front yard setback. <br /> Associate Planner Hartmann commented the Council discussed the possibility of a covered <br /> porch in lieu of the proposed deck as covered porches may encroach ten (10) feet into the front <br /> yard setback. The City Council then tabled the request to allow the Applicants time to pursue <br /> plans for a covered porch and return with an amended request. The Applicants are still proposing <br /> to replace the existing deck structure with a deck instead of building a covered porch. According <br /> to the Applicants, extending a roof over a covered porch on the south side of the house would <br /> block too much sunlight from the two windows. <br /> Associate Planner Hartmann explained based on a more accurate measurement that the <br /> applicants took of the distance from the front of the house to the front property line, the proposed <br /> seven and a half(7.5) foot wide deck would only encroach one (1) foot into the front yard setback <br /> because the house is precisely forty and a half(40.5) feet from the front property line. As stated <br /> above, decks in the R-1 district are permitted to encroach up to six (6)feet into setbacks as long as <br /> there is at least an another six (6) feet between the edge of the deck and the property line. <br /> Therefore, without an approved variance, a deck must maintain a setback of at least thirty-four <br /> (34)feet from the front property line. <br /> Associate Planner Hartmann reviewed the Plan Evaluation and offered the following amended <br /> Findings of Fact: <br /> 1. City Staff received a land use application for a request to build a replacement deck for a <br /> single-family dwelling at the Subject Property 1741 Venus Avenue. <br /> 2. A deck on a single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use in the R-1 district. <br /> 3. The Subject Property is non-conforming with the R-1 districts standards for minimum lot <br /> length and area requirements. <br /> 4. The Subject Property is nonconforming due to the sunken elevation of the front yard. <br /> 5. The proposed deck would encroach one (1)foot into the front yard setback. <br /> 6. If approved for a variance, the proposed development of the subject parcel would <br /> otherwise conform to all other requirements and standards of the R-1 district. <br /> 7. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a provision in the zoning ordinance would <br /> cause the landowner practical difficulties. <br /> 8. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and <br /> intent of the ordinance. <br /> Staff offered for Council's consideration approval of Planning Case 20-004 for a variance at 1741 <br /> Venus Avenue, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the <br /> following conditions: <br /> 1. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, engineering department staff shall review a revised <br /> landscaping plan to ensure no impacts to the right-of-way. <br /> 2. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. <br /> 3. The proposed building shall conform to all standards and regulations in the City Code. <br /> Mayor Grant asked if the applicant was attending the meeting. <br />