CCAgenda_94Apr13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I c City of Falcon Heights Planning Commission Meeting date: 28 February 1994 Agenda item: ITEM: Request for a variance to Chapter 9 -4.01 Subdivision (4) of fifteen feet three inches (15' -3 ")to the required thirty foot rear yard setback, and to Chapter 9 -2.04 Subdivision 1(c) of two feet three inches (2' -3 to thee required five foot side yard setback for 1775 Asbury Street SUBMITTED BY: Theodore Wiger, property owner REVIEWED BY: Philip Carlson, AICP, City Planning Consultant INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS: About six weeks ago Mr. Wiger spoke to the city's building official about plans for an addition to his home. The building official asked him to bring in a site plan with the proposed location of the new garage and addition to his home to see how it conformed to the zoning code. Mr. Wiger did so in mid February. After reviewing the site plan it became clear that Mr. Wiger needed a variance in the sideyard for his 44ifr" proposed garage and in his rearyard for the addition to his home. (P 2,51, Mr. Wiger's lot is 96 feet wide and 75 feet deep with a total square footage f 7,54 square feet. The area of the lot is not unusual for Falcon Heights residential lots. However, the lot is narrower than many lots, which are often 120 or more feet deep. Therefore, a variance in the thirty foot rearyard setback is required for the proposed construction. Neighboring property owners 1780 N Snelling Drive Dr. and Mrs. Olsen, the property owners at 1780 North Snelling Drive, to the west and rear of the Wiger home on Asbury, expressed an understanding of why a larger home would be desirable for the Wiger family. However, they have two concerns about how it would affect their property. They fear that the two story addition will be slightly over fourteen feet from their property line and will infringe on their privacy in their rear yard, which is not very large. They stated that they cannot use their sideyard because it is very noisy from the traffic along Snelling Avenue. They are concerned about the resale value of their home with a structure 14 feet from their rear lot Tine. 1<7SS sb ry: treetz The property owner expressed support for the improvement to the property because she fears that property will not be improved and may deteriorate if it isn't upgraded. 1 1777p.zm'i. This property is not contiguous to Mr. Wiger's property. It is to the southwest of the Wiger property. Mr. Zappa said that the variance request does not affect him and, therefore, he has no objection to it. He supports improvements to the homes in the neighborhood.