01-03-24 PC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for January 3, 2024 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2023\PC 23-023, 1666 Oak Avenue – VAR Page 5 of 9 3. Exceptions to the Minimum Requirements for All District (Covered Porches for Single- Family Detached Dwellings) – Section 1325.03 The Applicant’s proposed addition would not be permitted without a variance as the proposed would increase an existing nonconforming setback and extend closer than 30 feet from the front property line. Before May 2005, an addition into the required front yard setback would require a variance, whether the principal structure was already conforming or nonconforming with the Arden Hills Zoning Code. In May 2005, the City Council adopted an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that allowed covered front porches to encroach into the front setback under certain conditions without a variance, granted that the property already conformed with the applicable required front yard setback. One of these conditions was that the covered front porch could not be any closer than 30 feet to the front lot line. In April 2006, the City Council adopted an amendment to the covered front porch ordinance which removed the no closer than 30 feet condition and allowed for a more flexible but consistent standard. The amendment made it possible for properties platted and developed with a less than 40-foot front yard setback to construct a front porch. The ordinance amended in April 2006 is still a part of today’s Zoning Code. While the provisions of the covered front porch ordinance are applicable to the Subject Property, a variance is still required for a covered front porch as it is nonconforming and does not meet the criteria for expanding a nonconforming structure. As part of the variance application, the Applicant provided information about the proposed addition to be evaluated against the covered front porch provisions. Subd. 2(E) of Section 1325.03 establishes five (5) provisions for covered porch additions to single- family detached dwellings, provided the dwelling is conforming with the Zoning Code or is a nonconforming dwelling that meets the provisions for expansion as established in Section 1325.03 Subd. 2(D). Provisions 2, 3 and 4 apply to principal structures that are constructed after May 1, 2006. As the principal structure on the Subject Property was constructed in 1965, these provisions are not applicable. The Subject Property can be evaluated by Provisions 1 and 5 though a variance is required for the proposed covered porch addition submitted as part of the variance application. Provision 1 of Subd. 2(E) establishes “for already developed lots on which a principal structure existed prior to May 1, 2006, the Covered Porch shall not be closer to the front lot line and side yard corner as determined by the following provisions:” The provision goes on to provide a formula for calculating a covered porch addition setback by multiplying the current principal setback by .75. The existing principal structure setback for the Subject Property is 36.5 feet. Multiplied by .75, the result is 27.375. Based on the formula, a covered front porch on this lot could have a front yard setback of 27.375 feet, allowing for a 9.125-foot addition on this lot. The proposed addition would encroach 6.9 feet into the existing structure setback, which is below the permitted threshold according to this provision. Though the Applicant’s proposed covered porch would meet this provision, a variance is required because the existing principal structure setback of 36.5 feet is nonconforming with the setback required for the property. The original building permit showed the Subject Property was permitted with a 40-foot setback, the required setback for the property’s subdivision and the City when the structure was built in 1965. However, the principal structure was constructed with 36.5-foot setback and is nonconforming. As a result, the proposed covered porch addition requires a variance.