Laserfiche WebLink
• ANALYSIS <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 I1 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 /> • SIDEYARD SETBACK <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 /> VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS <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 /> • 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 /> s:planning:pc:v94-15 <br />