CCMin_95Dec20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

E City Council Minutes December 20, 1995 Page 2 2~" CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 95-35 REDUCING THE 1996 DEBT LEVY ON GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT The resolution being considered removes 5129,000 of city issued debt from the 1996 tax levy. The city will cover these costs with its available debt service funds. Motion was made by Councilmember Jacobs to approve Resolution 95-35 as presented. Motion passed unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 95-33 REGARDING A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AT 1596 NORTHROP STREET Phillip Carlson, city planning consultant, presented a variance request from Eric Schiffman and Karen Kloser, 1596 Northrop Street. He reported that the planning commission had reviewed the variance request and had produced a split vote (two commissioners recommending approval and two recommending denial). The request was for a variance in the front yard setback to construct a double car garage on the Folwell side of the subject corner lot property. The request that had been before the planning commission was for a seven foot front setback variance. However, since the time of that meeting, the applicants have modified their request to a four foot variance. Carlson reviewed the request with respect to the criteria for granting variances as cited in the zoning code. He also reviewed several different ways that atwo-car garage could be placed on this property, some of which were more intrusive from a planning perspective and some of which were not. Finally, Carlson noted that in order to grant a variance, the council should find that there are unique circumstances associated with the property that prevent the applicant from meeting the zoning standards (hardship) and that the variance granted should be the minimum needed to alleviate that hardship. Mr. Carlson's opinion was that there were two reasonable ways to construct a double car garage on this property, the first being the applicant's plan and the other involving a second driveway off of Northrop Street that would also require a variance. Carlson's opinion was that the variance for the second driveway would be less onerous than the applicant's plan for a front yard variance. However, he also recognized that impacts on neighborhood aesthetics are quite subjective and that the council could determine that the front yard variance is less burdensome. A double car garage could be built without a variance by building into the northwest corner of the property; however, this would encroach significantly into the sightlines along the street. He noted that many city codes require both lot frontages meet front yard setback requirements but that Falcon Heights' code allows a setback on the side of a corner lot to be at 20% of the lot width. The applicants, Dr. Schiffman and Ms. Kloser, presented their opinions on the proposed alternatives. Ms. Kloser noted that she had spoken with her neighbor to the east, who had concerns about the aesthetics of the garage and also voiced opposition to a garage located on the south end of the property. Dr. Schiffman described the design that he planned to use for the new garage and the problems that he foresaw with the alternative design with the two driveways.