PCP 11-01-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

make it difficult, though not necessarily impossible, to construct an accessory structure in the rear yard. . 5. Although most dwellings in the neighborhood have an attached two car garage, it is unlikely that the additional third stall would alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 6. The proposed garage addition is not based on economic considerations alone. Staff Analvsis In Staffs opinion, there is reasonable use of the property with the existing t\\<o car garage; however, the proposed addition may also be considered reasonable request for a property In the R-l Zone under modern residential expectations. Since there are a handful of other three car garages in the neighborhood and since there would still be approximately twenty-one feet between the two dwellings, the addition is also unlikely to detract from the essential character of the neighborhood. The remaining variance criteria, however, asks if the hardship is self-created. As is often the case, the answer to this part of the variance evaluation criteria is not entirely clear. The dwelling was constructed in such a way that adding a full third stall to the garage is not possible without a variance, which is, in a sense, a self-created hardship (even if due to the actions of a previous property owner). If the Planning Commission detcnnines that the hardship is indeed self-created, then the variance could be recommended for denial. While some grading would certainly need to occur, an accessory structure could conceivably be constructed in the rear yard, and the existing driveway could be extended around the side of the existing garage to . connect to a new accessory structure in the rear yard. Or, the proposed addition could be pushed back until there is at least ten feet between the closest part of the addition and the property line. While the addition would not be in line with the rest of the structure, which may create an odd appearance for the dwelling, a variance would not be required. However, if the Planning Commission agrees with the applicant that it would be a hardship to construct an accessory structure in the rear yard due to topographic limitations and granting the variance would be a reasonable use in the R-l Zone, the variance could be recommended for approval. A recommendation for approval could be done on the basis that the request is a reasonable use on the property as compared to the average property in the R-l Zone and topographical constraints inhibit construction in the rear portion of the property. If the Planning Commission recommends approval on this variance proposal, Staff recommends the following three conditions: 1. The northern property line shall be located by a certified land surveyor or the corner property pins shall be located to show the location of the northem property line prior to issuing any building permits. 2. The addition shall not be any closer than five feet to the north em property line. City o/Arden Hills Planning Commission /I1eetingf(Jr NOI'cmber I, 2006 . !~Me/ro-inl't.lIs~ardellhills\Plannillg\[,lallllillg Casesi2006!(JI)-031 POIIl'hcr Variance (PF:NDING)'IIlISO(, - PC Report- ['ollch",. Variallce.doc Page 6 of 7