Laserfiche WebLink
between 10.1 and 19.9 acres in the R1 -a zoning district. The amendment would <br />allow 6,000 square feet of accessory structure area on parcels of land between 20 <br />and 39.9 acres in this same zoning district. <br />Since the variance request was tabled at the October 16, 1995 Council meeting, <br />Mr. Kramer has had time to look more closely at the available pole barns and <br />the proposed ordinance amendment. After examining all of his options, Mr. <br />Kramer decided to increase the size of his proposal from a 40 foot by 60 foot pole <br />barn to a 40 foot by 72 foot pole barn. <br />Mr. Kramer currently has a 12.37 acre parcel with: <br />• a 23 foot by 26 foot (598 square foot) attached garage <br />• a 40 foot by 60 foot (2,400 square foot) detached garage and <br />• a 18 foot by 24 foot (432 square foot) shed <br />The three existing accessory structures equal 3,430 square feet. <br />The request is to add a <br />• 40 foot by 72 foot (2,880 square foot) detached metal pole building. <br />The total accessory structure area with all of the buildings would equal <br />• 6,310 square feet, or <br />• • 1,810 square feet greater than the ordinance allows. <br />• <br />However, the applicant has stated that if the variance is granted, he will remove <br />the 432 square foot shed. The total accessory area would then equal <br />• 5,878 square feet, which is still <br />• 1,378 square feet greater than the ordinance allows. _ <br />Staff advised Mr. Kramer that if he chose to combine his 12.37 acre parcel with <br />his adjacent 9.18 acre parcel he would not need to apply for the variance if the <br />proposed ordinance is approved. The combination of the two parcels would equal <br />21.55 acres and the proposed ordinance allows 6,000 square feet of accessory <br />structure area. Although there is no cost to combine parcels, Mr. Kramer chose <br />to keep the parcels separate and proceed with the variance request. <br />Planning Commission Recommendation <br />At the September 26, 1995, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning <br />Commission recommended denial of this variance because it did not meet the <br />five conditions needed to grant a variance according to the City Ordinance. <br />SAPLANN ING \KENDRA \V95 -8.DOC <br />