PL PACKET 06161998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 19, 1998 Page 2 1 Mr. Malenick submitted an application for a variance of,11/2 feet to the north sideyard in order 2 to be able to construct his home. The house he proposes to build is 46.5 feet wide and has a 5- 3 foot sideyard on the south and 8.5 on the north side of the lot.' The total square footage of 4 imperious surfaces is 3,806.5, including the proposed driveway and lot coverage is 23.9%. The 5 lot coverage is within the 35%lot coverage restriction as stipulated by City Ordinance. 6 Minnesota Statutes and City Ordinances require that several conditions must be satisfied for 7 approval of this variance request. As such, no variance will be granted unless the evidence 8 presented discloses that strict enforcement of the Ordinance would cause undue hardship because 9 the property cannot be put to a reasonable use without the variance. This parcel is only 60 feet 10 wide, as are many of the lots in this area; several of the homes were built between 1930 and 11 1969, before insulation and R-values were possibly considerations in the construction of these 12 homes; and the area is zoned R-1. Keeping this lot vacant would not be a reasonable use,nor its 13 greatest or best use. 14 The circumstances causing the hardship must also not be created by the owner. As reported by 15 Staff during the May 20, 1997 public hearing for the lot width variance for this parcel, this lot 16 was platted before the City's Zoning Ordinance was adopted, therefore this hardship was not 17 created by the current owner. 18 The variance, if granted, also will not alter the essential characteristic of this residential 19 neighborhood because Mr. Malenick plans to build a home in which he and his family plan to 20 occupy. This fact also proves that economic considerations are not a basis for this sideyard 21 variance request. 22 Chair Bergstrom questioned the general positioning of the proposed house on the lot. He noted 23 the City Ordinance that requires that the house have a frontyard depth equal to the greater of 30 24 feet or a distance equal to the average of the two adjacent lots. He questioned if the intent of this 25 requirement was that the houses be lined up along the street. 26 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated her interpretation of the Ordinance is that it is a minimum requirement 27 for the frontyard setback. 28 Mr. Malenick stated that if the house was closer to the street there would not be access to the 29 backyard to repair power lines or a major tree that is blown down. 30 Ms. Malenick stated that if the house were moved closer to the street the large trees in the 31 frontyard would have to be removed. 32 Chair Bergstrom noted that the area where the home is proposed to be built is low and expressed 33 concern of saturated soil conditions.