CCP 11-14-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Memo to City Council Planning Case #01-31 Page 3 of 4 2. Whether granting the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the City's Zoning Code. The variance would be keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning code. More specifically, granting the requested variance would "promote the character of and preserve and enhance the properties and areas within the city. . . ." 3. Whether the property in question can be put to a reasonable use without granting of a variance. Given the setbacks identified below, it does not appear as if a reasonable single family home can be constructed without the provision of a variance. 4. Whether the hardship was created by the property owner. The hardship was not created by the property owner. As evidenced by adjacent properties, lots were platted based on the different requirements at the time. e 5. Whether granting the variance will alter the essential character of the neighborhood. This will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. As the applicant indicates, the property owner directly across the street is also has a front yard setback of 30 feet. Additionally, there are only a few homes that directly front Edgewater. The remainder front small side streets. Deadline for AClencv Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on November 6, 2001. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by January 5, 2001 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 50-day review period. The City may with the petitioners consent, extend the review period beyond 120 days. Options 1. 2. 3. Recommend approval as submitted. Recommend approval with conditions. Recommend denial with reasons for denial. If the City denies the petitioners request, "...it must state in writing the reasons forthe denial at the time that it denies the request." Table for additional information. e 4.