CCP 07-28-2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3. Could the property in question be put to a reasonable use without the granting of the variance? Yes. The applicant could continue to use the property as a home with the deck in its current location. However, the home was built too close to the southern property line to allow for a deck of any size. The requested variance is for a reduction in the rear setback to allow the extension of a permitted accessory use. As stated in the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance: A variance or variances may be granted from specific provisions of this ordinance because such land factors as length of a side of a lot, the shape of the lot or the unusual terrain prohibit reasonable development equivalent to that which would be permitted without variance on a similar size lot located in the Same district, but which lot has no unusual configuration. The applicant has requested the variance due the site layout for a lot which was developed prior to their ownership of the property. The minimum lot dimensions in the R-I District on which the setbacks are based, 95 feet by 130 feet, would leave approximately 60 feet of buildable area lot depth. The combined depth of the applicants' house and depth of the proposed deck would be approximately 48 feet. Because of the unusual site layout, the applicants would not be able to extend their deck as they may have been able to do where there not the unusual configuration of the lot. 4. Was the hardship created by the owner? No. The property was developed in 1973 by a previous property owner. When the house was constructed it was built right up to the rear yard setback, not leaving any room for future expansion. The existing deck was also built by the previous owner. 5. Would granting the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The deck would not alter the character of this neighborhood. All of the properties along the south side of Indian Oaks Trail abut Floral Park. The deck addition would not be visible from most of the surrounding properties and would be minimally visible from two neighboring properties. In addition, since a heavily wooded area of Floral Park is directly south of this property there would virtually no visual impact on the Park property. Currently, there are a handful of properties in the general area which are located very close to the rear property line and which abut Floral Park. While there are approximately 10 properties in the area that would not be able to have a deck of 18-foot deep or less (measured from the rear property line to the closest point of PC 003-] 6 - PC Report 07/Q9103 - Page 5 of 6 - . . . .