My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-06-10-PC
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2010-2019
>
PC Packets 2010
>
01-06-10-PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/16/2015 9:18:25 AM
Creation date
1/5/2010 1:26:28 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
134
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
General Findings <br />1. The lot size meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning District. <br />2. The lot meets the depth requirements for the R-1 Zoning District. <br />3. The lot is only 70 feet wide which does not meet the 95 foot width requirement for the R- <br />1 Zoning District. <br />4. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home and construct a new home in its <br />place. <br />5. The existing home currently encroaches into both side setbacks. <br />6. The proposed home would encroach into the side yard setback to the west by nine feet <br />five inches, the front yard setback by three feet seven inches, and the required setback to <br />the OHw level by 17 feet six inches. <br />7. The proposed structure coverage meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning District. <br />8. The proposed minimum landscape area meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning <br />District. <br />9. The proposed home would not exceed 35 feet in height. <br />10. The proposed garage is outside of the 100 -year flood plain, wetlands, and easements. <br />11. There is no proposed tree removal for this project. <br />Variance Findings: <br />12. Single-family homes are a reasonable use within the R-1 Zoning District because they are <br />permitted within the Zoning Code. <br />13. The property is unique in the City due to the narrowness of the lot and steep topography <br />to the north. <br />14. The circumstances of the property were not created by the landowner because the lot was <br />platted prior to their taking ownership. <br />15. The proposed side yard setback would not alter the essential character of the <br />neighborhood because most homes in this area are non -conforming in terms of side yard <br />setbacks. <br />16. The proposed front yard setback would not likely alter the essential character of the <br />neighborhood because most homes in the neighborhood have similar front yard setbacks. <br />17. The proposed setback to the lake may alter the essential character of the neighborhood <br />because most homes are setback approximately 100 feet from the lake; however, because <br />there are homes that are nearer the lake than 100 feet as older homes in this community <br />are rebuilt it is likely that the prevailing setback will naturally move towards the lake. <br />18. The construction and location of the home is not based on economic considerations alone, <br />because tree preservation and setback considerations were the primary reason for the <br />proposed location of the home. <br />Recommendation <br />The findings of fact for this variance do not specifically support a recommendation for approval <br />or denial. The property is unique in the City. The narrowness of the lot, which is more narrow <br />City of Ar den dills <br />Planning Commission Meeting for January 6, 2010 <br />11Meti-o-inet.uslardenhillsiPlanninglPlanning Cases 12009109-022 1563 Edgeivater Avenue variance (Pending)WI-06-10 - PC Report Ranallo <br />Variance.doc <br />Page 5 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.