PL PACKET 07172012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

July 3, 2012 Page 3 a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code; A garage does not currently exist on the property, which materially impacts the owners' ability to use the property. Garages are common among most other homes in the neighborhood. A detached garage is a permitted accessory structure in the R -I zoning district. Therefore, staff finds the proposal reasonable. Criteria met. b. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the property owner; The existing home was constructed at a time when present rules regarding setbacks were not in existence. Additionally, the original construction did not include a garage or consider the placement of a garage in the future. Because the setbacks were not in existence the home was situated away from the two roadways. Thus the home was setback over 60 feet from Silver Lake Road without regard to providing a garage on the site. The locations for siting a garage on site are limited to the rear and side yards. The side yard in this case requires a 30 -foot setback because it is along a public street, thus the options for locating a garage become even more limited. The rear yard becomes the only location where a garage can be placed. Because the setback on the site is 31 feet, there is limited space in which a garage can be constructed. These circumstances were not created by the property owner. Criteria met. C. The variance, ifgranted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and The proposed garage will not alter the essential character of the locality. Detached garages are common within the City. The Applicant is proposing to construct the garage in a manner that is consistent with the principal structure. The proposed use remains a single family home in a single family neighborhood. Staff finds that the essential character of the locality will not be changed. Criteria met. d. Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. The Applicants wish to have a garage to protect their vehicles. Garages are typical to most homes in Minnesota given the state's climate. Therefore, economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. Criteria met. 3. The variance, ifgranted, would be consistent with the city's comprehensive land use plan. If the variance is granted, the use of the property would remain the same. The comprehensive plan guides this area for single family use and adding the garage will not alter that use. Criteria met. 4. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code. The intent of the zoning code is to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the city and its people through the establishment of minimum regulations governing land development and use. The zoning code is established to: