My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-28-22-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2022
>
11-28-22-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2022 3:34:45 PM
Creation date
11/23/2022 3:31:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
118
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
footprint would equate to 15.4% structure coverage (max allowed 25%) and 23.2% impervious <br />(max allowed 35%). <br />The table below provides the district standards for the R-1 District and the preliminary analysis <br />for the proposed development: <br />Required <br />Proposed <br />Lot Area <br />Minimum 14,000 SF <br />14,472 SF <br />Lot Width/Depth <br />95'/130' <br />95.96'/97.4' <br />Front Yard Setback — <br />Minimum 40' <br />16' <br />Ridgewood Road <br />Front Yard Setback — <br />Minimum 40' <br />10, <br />Snelling Avenue North <br />Side Yard Setback <br />10' Minimum/ <br />14' (south)/ <br />25' Combined <br />69.9' Combined <br />Driveway Access <br />Local Street — Ridgewood <br />Collector Street — Snelling <br />Road <br />Avenue North <br />Landscaped Area <br />Greater than 65% (Minimum <br />76% <br />9,407 SF <br />Structure Coverage <br />Less than 25% (Maximum <br />15.4% <br />3,618 SF <br />Floor Area Ratio <br />Less than 0.3 (Maximum <br />N/A <br />4,341 SF <br />Minimum <br />20' <br />46' <br />Dwelling/Structure Width <br />2. Variance Review <br />The role of the City Council is to determine and consider how the facts presented to them compare <br />with the city's articulated standards. The Council should base their decision on the facts presented <br />and then apply those facts to the legal standards contained in city ordinances and relevant state <br />law. Neighborhood opinion alone is not a valid basis for granting or denying a variance request. <br />While the City Council may feel their decision should reflect the overall will of the residents, the <br />task in considering a variance request is limited to evaluating how the variance application meets <br />the statutory practical difficulties factors. Residents can often provide important facts that may <br />help in addressing these factors, however, unsubstantiated opinions and reactions to a request do <br />not form a legitimate basis for a variance decision. <br />The City Council may impose conditions when granting variances as long as the conditions are <br />directly related and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. For instance, <br />if a variance is granted to exceed the front setback limit, any conditions attached should <br />presumably relate to mitigating the effect of the encroachment. <br />3. Variance Requirements — Section 1355.04, Subd, 4 <br />The Applicants are requesting a variance for the nonconforming lot depth, to decrease the required <br />front yard setback from 40 feet to a 10 foot setback from the property line abutting Snelling Avenue <br />North and a 16 foot setback from the property line abutting Ridgewood Road, and the driveway <br />access off Snelling Avenue North whereas city code requires access to be obtained from the local <br />Page 6 of 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.