09-05-07-PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

demonstrate that an addition that encroaches into a particular setback is reasonable as opposed to showing that the property would only have reasonable use with the addition. While this is a much softer interpretation of reasonable use, the applicant must still address all four variance criteria listed above. Findinl!s of Fact Staff offers the following thirteen findings of fact for review: General Findings 1. The lot size and width exceed the minimum R-2 requirements. The lot width of 65 feet is nonconforming in the R-2 Zone. 2. The existing garage encroaches 2.65 feet and the entryway encroaches 4.65 feet into the forty foot front yard setback. The structure meets all other R -2 setback requirements. 3. The proposed addition would encroach 2.65 feet into the front yard setback. Approximately 12.5 square feet of the proposed 257 square foot addition is within the front yard setback. The area of the addition outside of the setbacks does not require a variance. The proposed addition would be in line with the existing garage. 4. The proposed addition does not encroach on the rear or front setbacks. 5. The existing and proposed lot coverage meets the R-2 Zone requirements. 6. The dwelling with the proposed addition would not exceed the 35 foot height limit. 7. Dwellings are permitted structures within the R-2 Zone. 8. The existing dwelling and the proposed garage are outside of the 100-year flood plain, wetlands, and easements. 9. The lot was created and the structure was built prior to the incorporation of the City of Arden Hills. The structure was built in 1941. Variance Findings: 10. A dwelling and addition are reasonable uses within the R-2 Zone. 11. There does not appear to be any unique topographical conditions that warrant the variance. The substandard lot width for the R-2 Zone does limits access to the rear yard and may present a unique situation under the current regulations. There are not any topographical limitations on the property. 12. Since the proposed addition would not encroach any farther into the front yard setback than the existing structure, the addition is unlikely to have a negative impact on the property or the neighborhood. The continued encroachment would not have a noticeable visual impact. 13. The proposed plans and setback variance for the dwelling do not appear to be based on economic considerations alone. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor September 5.2007 \\Metro-inet.uslardenhil/siPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-021 Rakow Variance\090507 - PC Report - Rakow Variance.doc Page 5 of8