12-09-2020 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 7, 2020 2 located within the Shore Impact Zone with the intent to build a new structure. The previous structure was built prior to the adoption of the current City Code that restricts what structures can be built within the Shore Impact Zone, and was a legal nonconforming structure. Because the nonconformity was discontinued for a period of more than one year, and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the structure was removed, the previous structure cannot be rebuilt. The Applicant requires a Variance approval for this new structure because it is larger t han the previous legal nonconforming structure and is proposed too close to the shore. Associate Planner Hartmann explained the Applicant is proposing to build the accessory structure to gain more storage space for their belongings. According to the Applicant’s narrative submitted as a part of their application, the accessory structure is being proposed near the shore because it is the only area suitable for building given the steep topography in the rear yard. An accessory structure of this size is necessary because the paddleboards that his family owns are a minimum ten (10) to twelve (12) feet long and six (6) feet wide, hence the proposal is to request a storage structure with a length of 12 feet and a width of 10 feet. Associate Planner Hartmann reported the sketches submitted by the Applicant show that the structure would have a greater height, length, and width than what was allowed for the pre- existing structure, but would maintain the same setback distance from the shoreline as the previous struct ure. The Planning Commission is being asked to determine if a variance request for flexibility with the Shoreland Management District setback requirements should be approved for the proposed accessory structure. This structure requires flexibility from the restrictions for City Code within Shoreland Management Districts. The evaluation of the proposal should be based on the provisions within the Zoning Code and the Requirements for a Variance in Section 1355.04 , Subd. 4 and the Continuation of Nonconforming Uses in Section 1350.02. Associate Planner Hartmann reviewed the Shoreland Regulations, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: 1. City Staff received a land use application for a request to build an accessory structure for st orage at the Subject Property 3493 Siems Court. 2. Storage of personal items is a permitted use for an accessory structure in the R-1 Single Family Residential District. 3. The Subject Property has a steep downward slope in the rear yard that prevents the Applicant from building on much of the site. 4. The Subject Property meets the minimum lot size, width, and length requirements for the R-1 District. 5. The Applicant is requesting flexibility with the maximum height and size restrictions for a storage shed located within the setback requirement for Lake Johanna. 6. The rear yard setback requirement for a proposed accessory structure is determined by the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of Lake Johanna. 7. The OHWL setback from Lake Johanna is 50 feet. 8. A previous legal-nonconforming accessory structure was located at the Subject Property within the Shore Impact Zone where the Applicant is now proposing to build, but that previous structure was removed by the Applicant. 9. Because the nonconformity was discontinued for a period of more than one year, and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property was removed, the previous structure cannot be rebuilt. DRAFT