5 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to Planning Commission Page 2 Case No.V 96-1 February 27, 1996 • Subject Site The property is .36 acres in size, about 211 feet deep and 75 feet wide. The site has a house, a 20' X 24' detached garage and a small storage shed. The storage shed is setback 23 feet from the front property line in the area where the applicant is proposing to construct their second garage. Adjacent to the shed on the east is a small one car parking area. There are several trees on the west side of the storage shed. The site is level with no topographic limitations affecting the placement of the proposed second garage. Analysis There does not appear to be any physical, topographic or vegetative constraints that would prohibit the applicant from complying with the 30 foot setback requirement. Locating the garage as proposed by the applicant would require the removal of the only trees in that area of the front yard; placing the garage so that it complies with the setback requirement would allow the applicant to save the existing trees on the west side of the storage shed. Those trees would provide some screening between the garage and the road. Staff refers the Planning Commission to Section 900.40 of the Elk River Code of • Ordinances for the standards to consider when reviewing a variance. Staff also refers the Commission to the applicant's letter which outlines their reasoning for this variance request. It is not clear what undue hardship the applicant will face by complying with the 30 foot setback requirement. Complying with the 30 foot setback will still allow for about 70 feet between the house and the proposed garage and will preserve the existing trees on that side of the front yard. There does not appear to be any special conditions unique to this site that are not applicable to other properties in the area. The variance will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood. However, the variance will impact the aesthetics of the neighborhood. Of the 23 lots on this cul-de-sac de sac, there appears to be one property with a storage shed which violates the front yard setback and possibly one garage that does. Both of these properties are not adjacent to the applicant but are towards the other end of the cul-de-sac. Recommendation It is Staff's opinion that this request does not meet the five standards required to grant a variance and, therefore, recommends denial of the 10 foot front yard setback variance based on the following findings: • s:\planning\scott\v96-1.doc