1999 Planning Commission Packets

Home Browse Search

. ;'. . . ;. , ;, . Planning Commission RcsoEution 568-9$ Gates Variance January fi, 1999 Page 2 WHEREAS, the literal interpretation of the provisions of this Titie tivoulrl deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in thai the literal interpretation of the lang�aage regarding accessory buiiding height, if upheid, would reguire the applicant to demolish the work aiready completed on the garage expansion (i.e., remove footings, foundation, s[ab, walls) so as to excavate one foot deeper, repour the floor, reinstall the footings and foundation. If the garage floor were excavated as such one foot deeper, no variance wouid be requirecE as the l�eight of accessory buildings is measured from the exterior grade, not the interior floor elevation.; and, '►NHEREAS, special conditions or circumstances rlo noi resuit from �he actions ogthe app(icant in t/a�at whiie Mr. Gates is responsible for owning a vehicle which does not conform to City Code, he is attempting to correct the situation by constructing a garage with a one-foot va�iance in orcfer to park the vehicle inside; and, WHEREAS, granting the variance requested wor�lrl not confer on the app(icant a special privilege that is denied by this Titfe to owners or other lands, structures or buildings in the same district in that staff would instruci future applicanfs intent upon parking an oversize vehicles within a garage how to make such arrangements without ihe need for a variance. Because staff told Mr. Gates that the truck would need to be removed after construction had already begun on the garage addition, staffcouid not offes Ivlr. Gates this advice; and, W�REAS, the variance requested as the minimutn variance which woul� alleviate the hardship, in tdaat in order to reconfigure the garage to a(low for the truck to be parked inside, the garage door wiI! need ta be made one-foot taller. Because of the added door height, the garage in turn would become one foot taEter. This is the ininimum variance possible with keeping the jarage roof in tine with the roof of the home; and, WHEREAS, the variance ivould not be materialiy cletrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other properties in the same zone in thr�t many attached garages have taller roofs to znatch the roof-Iine of the home. The one-foot increase will be imperceivabfe to the general pubiic and the public benefits from not having to see the applicant's work vehicle parked in front of the home; and, WHEREAS, the variance svoul�l nvt impair an adequate suppEy of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets ar increase the danger of fre or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighbarhood in t/zat the one foot difference fram what is ailowed and what is requested wiii not impair any neighboring properiies' suppfy of li,�ht or air, it will not create any additional traffic impact nor will it increase the danger of fire or endanger the gubEic safety. There wouid not be any impact to property values in the immediate area.. NQW, THEREFORE, BE IT RES�LVED, that the Mounds View Planning Cammission, acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, approves the variance to ailow a lb-foot tall garage at 5364 Clifton Drive, in accordanee with ihe building plans on fiIe with th� Building Inspector.