10-19-2016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Case MU2016-002 October 19, 2019 Page 3 d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title has had no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. f. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties. g. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Staff’s analysis of how the requested Conditional Use Permit and Variance comply with the City Code, may be found in the attached Resolutions. Summary The applicant has requested (1) a Conditional Use Permit for a 1,227 sq ft oversized garage; and (2) a Variance to allow the garage addition to encroach 6” into the side yard setback. A Public Hearing notice was published in the New Brighton-Mounds View Sun Focus on Sept 30, 2016, and mailed to property owners within 350’ of the subject property. Recommendation Staff recommends Resolution 1057-16, recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit, and Resolution 1058-16 approving the Variance. It is Staff’s opinion that the Conditional Use Permit request is consistent with the City Code. Further, it is Staff’s opinion that the practical difficulty supporting the Variance is that a previous owner constructed the attached garage 6” too close to the side yard property line. If the garage addition were to continue this 6” encroachment, it would not negatively affect the neighborhood’s character, considering the existing attached garage has had this encroachment since its construction in 1975. The Planning Commission is requested to consider the following options, including conducting a Public Hearing for the Variance request: