Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ANALYSIS <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />As staff reviewed the site plan for the proposed addition, it was discovered <br />that the existing building was located 20 feet from the side lot line. Required <br />setbacks in the 11 zoning district are 30' front yard setback, 20' rear yard <br />setback and 25' side yard setback. When the existing building was <br />constructed, staff inadvertently determined that the south property line was <br />the rear property line, due to the location of the existing cul-de-sac. <br />Therefore, the building was allowed to be constructed 20 feet from the <br />southern property line. Ulysses Street is proposed to extend south in the <br />future, therefore, the south property line should have been classified as a side <br />lot line, making the building nonconforming. In order to remain consistent, <br />the applicant wishes to follow the same building setback of 20 feet for the <br />new addition. Mr. Weicht feels it would be a hardship to require a 25 foot <br />side yard setback for the new addition because it would lead to an inefficient <br />layout, be more expensive to construct and aesthetically unpleasing, due to <br />the staggered setback. The staggered setback would also do very little to <br />minimize the overall effect of the building in relation to the side property <br />boundary. The applicant did indicate that there would have been ample <br />room to construct the building 25 feet from the lot line, when the building <br />was built in 1993. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />SIDEYARD SETBACK <br /> <br />Staff is currently studying whether or not a 25 foot setback is necessary in <br />the industrial zoning districts. In the future staff may propose an ordinance <br />amendment, requesting that the side yard setback be reduced to 20 feet. A <br />20 foot side yard setback would allow more flexibility in placement of <br />structures on industrial parcels and would still give adequate spacing <br />between buildings for fire protection and other safety issues. <br /> <br />VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS <br /> <br />Staff refers the Planning Commission to Section 900.40 of the Elk River Code <br />of Ordinances for the five standards to consider when reviewing a variance <br />application. Staff feels there are adequate findings to approve the variance. <br /> <br />. Literal enforcement of the ordinance would cause unnecessary hardship <br />due to the fact that the existing building already is located 20 feet from <br />the property line and the proposed addition would be a logical extension of <br />the existing building, and would do little to minimize the overall impacts <br />of the proximity of the building to the side property line. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />s:planning:pc:v94-15 <br />