08-01-07-PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

7. The proposed relocated detached accessory structure would be 5.6 feet from the westem property line and 6.9 feet from the southem property line. The new accessory structure would still be encroaching on the westem and southem property line setbacks, which . . reqUIres a vanance. 8. The applicant proposes to install a new 1067.1 square foot paved driveway and a 439.2 square foot gravel driveway. A new gravel driveway requires a variance. 9. The proposed redevelopment does not exceed the 25 percent structure limit or necessitate a reduction in the 65 percent landscape requirement. No variances are needed for lot coverage. 10. The proposed new dwelling does not exceed the 35 foot height limit. 11. The proposed new dwelling and accessory structure are permitted uses in the R-2 Zone. 12. The existing dwelling and the proposed garage are outside of the 100-year flood plain, wetlands, and easements. Variance 1: On the dwelling western property line setback encroachment variance: 13. A dwelling with attached garage is a reasonable use within the R-2 Zone. 14. The topography of the property is somewhat unique, and that may WatTant a setback variance from the western property line for the dwelling with the attached garage. 15. Given the location of the property and development characteristics of adjacent properties, it is unlikely that the proposed dwelling and attached garage would negatively impact the character of the surrounding neighborhood or City. The structure to the south is 40 feet from the westem property line while the structures to the north are close as ten feet to the westem property line. 16. The proposed plans and setback variance for the dwelling do not appear to be based on economic considerations alone. Variance 2: On the nonconforming accessOl)' structure relocation variance: 17. An accessory structure is a permitted and reasonable use within the R-2 Zone. 18. If the west em property line is designated as the rear property line, it appears that constructing the accessory structure in a confomling location would be feasible. 19. Moving the proposed accessory structure an additional 4.5 feet east and 3.4 feet north would eliminate the need for a variance but increase the need for fill. 20. Since the existing accessory structure, which would be removed, is closer to the lot lines that then proposed accessory structure, it is unlikely that the new accessory structure would have any noticeable impact on the surrounding neighborhood or City. 21. The proposed plans and variance for the accessory structure do not appear to be based on economic considerations alone. Variance 3: On the gravel driveway variance: 22. The property can be put to reasonable use without the gravel portion of the driveway. If the gravel driveway were improved with a paved, concrete, paver, or other similar surface, it would not cause the redevelopment to exceed the impervious coverage limit for the lot. City of A rden Hills Plallning Commission !vfeetingjol' July I I, 2007 IlMefro-iIlCI.lIs\ardcnhillslPlmlllingIPJalllling Cascs\2007107-016 Gonzalez Variance (PC Tab/e)\071 107 - PC Repon - GO/lw/ez Variance.doc Page 9 of 13