Laserfiche WebLink
Page 5 of 9 <br /> <br />addition would maintain the existing building line of the structure at a setback of 5.8 feet from the <br />south side yard property line. The proposed addition would conform to rear setback requirements. <br />The structure located on the parcel south of the Subject Property is approximately 18 feet from the <br />existing structure. <br /> <br />Landscaped Area <br />In the R-3 District, the minimum landscaped area required without a variance is 65% of the <br />property or 3,900 square feet. The Subject Property has an existing landscaped area of 3,906 square <br />feet or 65%. The proposed addition would decrease the total landscaped area to 3,710 square feet, <br />or 62% percent of the property. <br /> <br />Structure Coverage <br />The R-3 District allows for a maximum structure coverage of 25% or 1,500 square feet on the <br />Subject Parcel. The existing structure coverage is 1,626 square feet or 27%. This does not conform <br />to the requirements of Section 1320.06 of the Arden Hills City Code. The proposed addition would <br />increase the total structure coverage by 196 square feet for a total of 1,822 square feet, or 30% of <br />the Subject Property. <br /> <br />Floor Area Ratio <br />In the R-3 District, the maximum allowed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is 0.3, or 1,800 square feet on <br />the Subject Property. The existing floor area is 1,837 square feet, equally a FAR of .31. The <br />proposed addition will increase the FAR to 0.36, or 2,188 square feet. <br /> <br />2. Variance Review <br /> <br />The role of the Planning Commission is to determine and consider how the facts presented to them <br />compare with the city’s articulated standards. The Commission should base their decision on the <br />facts presented and then apply those facts to the legal standards contained in city ordinances and <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 /> <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 front setback limit, any conditions <br />attached should presumably relate to mitigating the effect of the encroachment. <br /> <br />3. Variance Requirements – Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 <br /> <br />The Applicants request a variance to construct a 14’ by 12’ deck and a 14’ by 14’ home addition. <br />The Planning Commission will need to make a determination utilizing the following variance <br />findings and criteria on whether there are practical difficulties with complying with the zoning <br />regulations. If the applicants do not meet all the factors of the statutory test, then a variance should <br />not be granted. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes <br />and intent of the ordinance.