CCP 06-24-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Memo to Planning Commission Planning Case #02-11 Page 3 of 4 There are no circumstances that are particularly unique to the property. However, as previously stated, the southwest side of the house does currently extend into the 30 foot setback. The addition would match the existing. 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. . .." From staff's perspective, this addition would create more architectural interest than extending the property into the side yard. 3. Whether the property in question can be put to a reasonable use without granting of a variance. With our without the addition, the property can be put to use as a single family home. 4. Whether the hardship was created by the property owner. At this point, no specific hardship can be identified. 5. Whether granting the variance will alter/he essential character of the neighborhood. This will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. As the applicant indicates, there is significant separation between properties in the area. Deadline for AQency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on May B, 2002. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by July 7,2002 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional60-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."