09-26-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . · To promote the general public health, safety, comfort and general welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota. (l,B,l) . To promote the proper use ofIand and structures, (I,B,6) · To fix reasonable standards to which buildings, structures and land shall conform for the benefit of all (I ,B, 7) The stated purpose of the R-2 Single and Two Family Residential District is as follows (Section 5,D,2): 1, To establish areas for the development of single and two family housing at a maximum density of approximately five units per net acre, 2, To reserve development areas for single and two family housing. 3. To restrict encroachment of incompatible uses, 4. To maintain density limitations, 5, To take advantage of municipal utilities. 6, To preserve open space, (YES) The variance requested appears to comply with the stated Purpose and Intent of the City's Zoning Ordinance and of the purpose of the R-2: Single and Two Family Residential District. Due to the narrow lots which are unique to this small portion of the City it would not be reasonable to force the property owners to place their garages to comply with the 10 foot side yard accessory setback and basically sever the rear yard or to have the locate the garages especially far behind the principal structures. In addition, principal structures which should be considered a more intense use can be located as close as 5 feet from the side yard property line, 3. Could the property iu question be put to a reasonable use without the granting of the variance'! (NO) The applicant could continue to use the existing garage in its present location; however, due to the age of the garage replacement would be necessary sometime in the very near future. Without a variance the applicant would have to place the garage either in the middle of the back yard or excessively far away from the principal structure, where the garage would still be in the middle of the back yard. Single and Two-car garages have consistently been considered reasonable uses if the applicant has no other option than to apply for a variance for the construction of such a garage, Furthermore, the City has approved variances for similar variance requests in this neighborhood where the applicant is replacing an existing garage. 4. Was the hardship created by the owner? (NO) The small one-car garage appears to be the original garage from when the house was constructed and predates the City's Zoning Ordinance, In addition, the lot was created prior to the City's Zoning Ordinance. The structure is small, in poor repair, and \\Metro~inet.lls\A.rdenHil1s\PlaIlning\Planning Cases\2005\05-20 Ruppel Variance (PENDING)\09-07...o5 PC Report Ruppel Variance PC-05- 20.doc Page 4 of6