Laserfiche WebLink
To: St. Anthony City Council Members <br /> Re: Planning Committee Public Hearing for Garage Side-Yard Setback Permit-3515 Harding <br /> The St. Anthony Planning Committee voted unanimously to deny the garage setback permit <br /> request at a public hearing on September 21. , <br /> Prior to ruling on the permit request,the subject property owner would like the City Council to <br /> consider the following items which were not brought up during the Planning Committee hearing: <br /> 1. The Committee failed to consider the highest and best use of the property,focusing instead on <br /> whether the setback variance was absolutely necessary. In any variance case, it can always be <br /> successfully argued that the variance is not an absolute necessity. The Committee failed to <br /> examine the highest and best use of the lot in question and ignored the fact that granting the setback <br /> variance would impose absolutely no hardship on the adjoining land owner(due to the <br /> pre-existence of a six foot privacy fence on the adjoining property line). See also#5 below. <br /> 2. Driving less than one block south on Harding Street from 3515 Harding,the following <br /> observations can be made: <br /> 3511 Harding: Driveway appears to be 6 inches from the adjoining property line. <br /> • <br /> .3507 Harding: Garage appears to be 3 feet(not 5 feet)from the adjoining property line. <br /> 3432 Harding: Garage appears to be 3 feet(not 5 feet)from the adjoining property line. <br /> 3421 Harding: Garage appears to be on the adjoining property line. <br /> None of this was considered by the Planning Committee. In each of these examples,just <br /> one-half block south of the subject property,garages could have been placed elsewhere on their <br /> respective lots. One must assume that variances were granted in order to facilitate a more practical <br /> use of available land. <br /> Another striking-feature about the above properties is the impact of the variance on neighboring <br /> properties. It is significantly higher than the impact of a garage setback.variance on the subject <br /> property. <br /> 3. The adjoining property owner to the south of the subject property has an overhang which is just <br /> two feet from the subject property's line. This is apparently in violation of local ordinance but was <br /> ignored by the Planning Committee. <br /> • <br />