CCP 11-13-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Planning Commission Meeting, 11-7-90 Page 2 CASE #90-16 (Cont'd) 4. An implied lilnitation on variances allows no greater variance than that necessary to achieve the objectives of . the request. In this case, a garage of slightly over 30 feet in length is allowed without a variance. 'Ihe Planner noted he was advised by Mr's. Hauck that there is a room inside the garage, approx:i1nately 7 ft. wide, which prohibits parking a vehicle in that area; he showed the room on the diagram displayed for Commission. 5. 'Ihere are no physical =nditions, in terms of topography, trees to be saved, size or shape of the lot, or relationship to ab.J.tting property relative to the requested garage variance. 'Ihe Planner recommended that the 8.2 foot variance for expansion of a garage at 1388 Arden Oaks Drive be denied, based on the findings listed in his report. Bergly referred Commission to the findings on page 2 of his report, relating to the rear yard variance request: 1. On corner lots, the shorter street frontage is established as the front lot line, the line opposite the front lot line is established as the rear lot line, and the area between the rear lot line and the principal sb:ucture is the rear yard which must have a minilnum depth of 30 feet. 'Ihe intent of this definition is to have a greater lot depth than width, resulting in a larger rear yard and lesser side yards. 2. The lot's mean horizontal east/west dimension is approximately 177 feet, while the mean horizontal north/south dimension is approximately 110 feet. Because the minilnum depth allowed is 130 feet and no variances were granted for the 100-foot depth, we will assume that the lot was intended to have its depth in . an east/west direction and its width in a north/south direction. Technically, the shape of the subject lot requires the north street line to be the front lot line because it is 2.52 feet shorter than the west street line. 3. The applicant has proposed a 14-foot by 16-foot addition to the rear of the house. This would leave a rear yard of 27.6 feet and would required a variance of 2.4 feet fram the minimum rear yard requirement. 'Ihe proposed deck does not require a variance, as it is a permitted en=oachroent. 4. If the proposed addition were placed on the east end of the house, a variance would not be needed. However, there are no windows or doors on the east end, but there is a sliding glass door on the south, providing access to the proposed addition. The organization of rooms in the house also suggests that the addition on the south would be =re appropriate. 5. The neighboring house to the south has a garage on the side abutting the subject lot, with no windows or doors on that side. A deck is on the east end of this house and has four 12-foot red pine that screen the deck fram the subject lot. 'Iherefore, the proposed addition will have little adverse effect on the neighboring property. 6. 'Ihe variance requested is the minilnum that is required to allow consb:uction of a reasonably shaped and sized roam. . -.-----.--------