CCP 12-14-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ ~ ". CITY OF ARDEN HILLS . MEMORANDUM DATE: December 14, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Nancy Randall, Associ e Plan r SUBJECT: December Planning Case 98-29, 98-32, 98-31 Case #98-29, Variance - Side Yard Setback (Porch), Mark & Roberta Thompson, 3413 Snelling Avenue N. Request. The applicant is requesting approval ofa side yard setback variance (4 feet 6 inches proposed, when 10 feet is required) for a porch on a single-family lot zoned R-1 (Exhibit A), Background. The driveway enters from the east side where there is only a tuck under style garage for entry to the home. The door on the south side of the home serves as a front door for the home. The existing porch is 6 by 8 feet 6 inches (51 square feet), The . applicant wishes to replace the existing porch in the same location with a slightly larger porch. The home is a split entry style. " The existing porch is 7 feet 6 inches from the property line. Typically in this zone structures are to be at a required 10 foot setback. However, the Zoning Ordinance Section VI, C, 2, a. allows for encroachments some specified parts of the principal structure. The structure must not encroach more than three feet into the required setback and in no case have less than a five foot setback. The existing porch meets the encroachment perimeters, The applicant is proposing a 10 by 12 foot (120 square foot) porch placing the new pilings beyond the existing structure and cantilevering a portion to the edge of the retaining wall. The proposed porch will encroach more than three feet into the setback as allowed by the permitted encroachments. However, the applicant has agreed to bring the request back 6 inches to meet the required five foot setback portion of the provision. Deadline for Agency Actions. The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on November 2, 1998. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by Friday, January 1, 1999 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 day review period. The additional review period would extend to Tuesday, March 2, 1999. The City may, with the petitioners consent, extend the review period beyond the Tuesday, March 2, 1999 . date.