06-01-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5131 Greenwood Drive Variance Request June 1, 2005 Page 2 The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition to the front of the existing attached garage. The garage addition would extend sixteen (16) feet past the front of the house. As proposed, the garage addition would be nineteen (19) feet from the front property line. In other words, the applicant is requesting a sixteen (16) foot variance from the prevailing setback, which in this case also means an eleven (11) foot variance from the thirty (30) foot minimum setback requirement. The proposed garage would meet all other setback requirements. Staff pointed out other possible options for additional garage space, such as adding a garage to the backyard, however, the applicant feels that this is the best possible solution to meet his storage needs. Variance Considerations: For a variance to be approved, the applicant needs to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. Minnesota statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission, in this case) review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The criteria are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. The property has an area of 13,068 square feet and has 100 feet of street frontage. This lot exceeds the minimum lot requirements for a single family lot. Staff is not aware of any extraordinary circumstances that apply to this property. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, unless a hardship is proven. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. It must first be determined that a special condition or circumstance exists. d. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Granting the variance would confer upon the property owner a special privilege denied to others (with similarly sized parcels) in the same district.