pf08-022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

4.0 BACKGROUND 4.1 Ms. Sagert owns the residential property at 2730 St. Albans Street. The property has a Comprehensive Plan designation of Low-Density Residential (LR) and a zoning classification of Single-Family Residence District (R-1). 42 This variance request is prompted by physician's recommendation that Ms. Sagert minimize her use of stairs as they exacerbate permanent injuries sustained in a vehicle accident. The existing garage is in the basement of the home, which makes stair climbing unavoidable, whereas the detached garage would be on the same level as the main floor of the Sagerts' home. 4.3 The existing garage would continue to be used as garage space. S.O STAFF COMMENT 5.1 Section 1004.01 A(6) (Maximum Total Surface Area) of the City Code limits impervious coverage to 30% of a single-family residential property. On this lot, up to 3,300 square feet of impervious surface area would be allowed. Existing impervious surfaces (2,450 square feet) cover about 22% of the lot, and the proposed 440-square-foot garage and 1,360-square-foot driveway would increase the impervious surface area to 4,250 square feet, or 38.6% of the lot. 5.2 If the 80-square-foot garden shed were removed, the total proposed impervious coverage would be reduced to 4,170 square feet, or 38% of the lot. While this reduction may not be substantial, the Variance Board has routinely required the removal of garden sheds as a condition of variance approvals that enable new garages to be built. 5.3 Section 1013 of the Code states: "Where there are practical difficulties or unusual hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this code, the variance Board shall have the power, in a specific case and after notice and public hearings, to vary any such provision in harmony with the general purpose and intent thereof and may impose such additional conditions as it considers necessary so that the public health, safety, and general welfare may be secured and substantial justice done. " 5.4 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6(2) provides authority for the city to "hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. `Undue hardship' as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the properry exists under the terms of the ordinance ... The board or governing body as the case muy be may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect ". PF08-022 RVBA 070208 Page 2 of 4 ^ r� --�