Laserfiche WebLink
The Owner proposes to remove an existing storage structure located within the front yard setback and <br />replace it with a larger storage structure constructed to reduce the existing front yard setback. The front <br />yard of this property abuts Heritage Drive at the Dakota Trail. There are no additional houses beyond <br />this property. The proposed storage structure will be attached to the existing house and will be large <br />enough to house typical maintenance equipment and recreational items that are currently stored <br />outside in the elements. Due to the original orientation of the house and driveway, the existing shed <br />was constructed in what is considered the front yard of the property. For the same reasons, the most <br />practical location for the proposed structure is in the same location. The original site plan, the driveway, <br />the site topography, and the existing landscape make it difficult to position the proposed structure in <br />any other location. <br />1. The Owner proposes to construct a garage in the front yard of the property. Part of the <br />structure will be within the required setback for structures in the front yard. The structure is <br />allowed in the front yard, but not positioned as requested. <br />2. The original house and driveway were positioned on the property such that the side of the <br />house where the garage is proposed is considered the front yard of the property. The <br />topography of the property is such that the most practical location of the proposed garage is as <br />requested. There are also trees on the property that will make it difficult to position the new <br />structure without damage to the landscape. These conditions were not created by the current <br />landowner. <br />3. The current property consists of a house with a detached garage and outdoor storage. The <br />proposed plan consists of a house with an attached garage and the outdoor storage will be <br />moved indoors. This should improve the essential character of the locality. <br />4. The practical difficulty is due to previous site planning and topography. Economic considerations <br />are not applicable. <br />5. N/A <br />6. The Owner proposes to continue to use the property as allowed for property in the zone where <br />the land is located. <br />7. N/A <br />8. The special conditions are peculiar to this property and were created by the original orientation <br />of the residence and the location of the driveway from the street. <br />9. This is a unique situation created by the original site plan and the topography. <br />10. This property is located in a harsh and variable climate (Minnesota) and reasonable protection <br />of one's private property from the elements is necessary. Constructing an enclosure for that <br />protection is considered reasonable. <br />11. The intent of the Zoning Code is to allow for residential construction in this location. The Owner <br />proposes to do just that. Allowing the proposed variance will not impair the health, safety, <br />comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. <br />12. The construction of an attached garage in the proposed location on the lot is allowed by the <br />Code. The Owner proposes a structure large enough to contain the equipment and recreation <br />vehicles that he owns. There is a smaller structure located on the proposed building site that <br />encroaches into the setback more than the proposed structure. The topography and original <br />placement of the house make it impractical to place the proposed attached garage in any other <br />location on the property. We consider the need for storage on the site, with topographical <br />