PCP 03-01-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2. The accessory structure is in the front yard, which is not allowed. However, because the lot abuts a lake and because the lot width limits access to the rear portion of the lot, it would be impractical to move the accessory structurc to . the rear yard. 3. The proposed accessory structure exceeds the maximum 728 square feet of detached accessory structure square footage by approximately three square feet. 4. The circumstances related to this variance are unique to the property. The twenty foot wide utility easement that crosses the property immediately in front of the dwelling from north to south means that it would not be possible to construct an attached garage to the dwelling. 5. Granting this variance would be in keeping with the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance allows accessory structures in the R-2 Zone and would allow a largcr structure attached to the dwelling if that were possible. 6. The applicant does currently have reasonable use of the property with the existing dwelling and accessory structure without the additions. However, the unique circumstanccs of the property limit thc use of the property compared to other propel1ies within the R-2 Zone. 7. The hardship was not creatcd by the owner. Many of thc lots along the western side of Lake Johanna are non-conforming, including the three lots immediately south of the subject property. 8. Granting the variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Of the 22 properties along the southwestcrn edge of Lake Johanna, twelvc properties have an accessory structure or part of the principal . structure encroaching on thc front yard setback. 9. The variancc is not based on economic considerations alone. The arca on most of thc lots along the southwestern side of Lake Johanna limits the potential locations of accessory structures. 10. Detachcd accessory structures up to 728 square feet are allowed in the R-2 Zone; however, the unusual configuration of this lot and the character of the neighborhood make this a unique situation in the R-2 Zone. Staff Recommendation Should the Planning Commission wish to make separate recommendations for approval or denial, the recommended conditions have been separated into Planning Case #06-006a for the principal structure variance and Plamling Case #06-006b for the accessory structure variance. In Planning Case #06-006a, staff recommends approval of the variance to construct an addition to the principal structure based on the findings of fact and subject to the following three conditions: City ojArden Hills Planning Commission Meeting/or March f, 2006 . IIMetro-inet.us\ardenhillsIPlanningIPlanning Cases\2006W6-006 Westlund variance (PEND/NG)lOl1506 ~ PC Report - Westlund Variance. doc Page 6 of 8