2015-06-03_VB_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

can’t help but become a more conspicuous encroachment, even though part of the structure will 47 be below grade. 48 City Code §1004.08C (Improvement Area) limits impervious surfaces on a residential property to 49 30% of the overall parcel area. Theapplicant measured the existing principal structure, detached 50 garage, driveways, and sidewalks on the property and calculated that these improvements total 51 6,027 square feet. Ramsey County’s data on the parcel’s boundaries allow the parcel area to be 52 calculated at approximately 19,933 square feet; the existing impervious surfaces, then, cover just 53 over 30% of the parcel area. This figure is slightly different than the applicant’s calculation, but 54 the difference is due to the fact that the parcel area figures in Ramsey County’s database (which 55 Mr. Snell used, reasonably, for his calculation) are often at odds with the parcel area calculated 56 by measuring the parcel boundaries. In the case of a variance, which would attempt to account 57 for the full deviation from zoning code standards, it is prudent to use the more conservative 58 calculation as represented in this paragraph. The effect of the discrepancy on this application in 59 minimal, though, since each of the individual elements of Mr. Snell’s proposal would cause the 60 impervious coverage to exceed the 30% limit, so any combination of the proposed improvements 61 would necessitate the requested variance from this part of the zoning code. 62 The intent of the limit on impervious surfaces is to ensure that storm water runoff from excess 63 impervious coverage does not become problematic for surrounding properties or for the public 64 storm sewer infrastructure. If improvements are allowed which increase the impervious coverage 65 on this property, best management practices can be required to mitigate the storm water from the 66 impervious surface area beyond the 30% limit. 67 68 R: Section 1009.04C of the City Code establishes 69 EVIEW OF VARIANCE APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS a mandate that the Variance Board make fivespecific findings about a variance request as a 70 prerequisite for approving the variance. 71 The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Division staff believes 72 that the proposal is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because, while the proposed 73 improvements do represent reinvestment in a residential property, the scale of the proposed 74 garage addition/conversion is much more commercial in nature than residential. 75 The proposal is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the zoning ordinances. Planning 76 Division staff believes that a large additional encroachment into the required front yard 77 setback as proposed is not in harmony with the intent of the zoning code because it would 78 significantly increase a nonconforming condition that is already unique in the neighborhood. 79 Staff also believes that the expansion of a front-facing overhead garage door is inconsistent 80 with the purpose of the pertinent zoning requirement, which has been discussed at length and 81 is explicitly intended to “create streets that are pleasant and inviting, and to promote building 82 faces which emphasize living area as the primary function of the building or function of the 83 residential use.” 84 The proposal puts the subject property to use in a reasonable manner.While the existing 85 detached garage is large enough to accommodate up to 6 closely-spaced automobiles, the 86 applicant indicatesthat the 2005 home addition makes daily parking in the detached garage 87 unnecessarily difficult, which puts greater value on the usability of the attached, tuck-under 88 garage. If that attached garage is failing, then it is reasonable to repair it, and the Variance 89 Board has historically been willing to consider variances to allow one-car garages to be 90 PF15-006_RVBA_060315 Page 3 of 5