Laserfiche WebLink
Al. The analysis contained within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid <br />memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials <br />distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. <br />A2. The Property is located within the LR -IA Single Family Rural Residential District which <br />requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres and a minimum lot width of 200' for construction <br />of a single family residence. <br />A3. The Property is 0.35 acres in area, being 120 feet in width. The Property is considered as <br />legally nonconforming with regard to lot area and lot width. <br />A4. The Property is located within Storm Water Overlay District Tier 1 which allows 25% <br />hardcover. The proposed residence construction will result in hardcover on the Property <br />of approximately 24.88%, below the maximum hardcover allowance. <br />A5. In considering this application for variances, the Council has considered the advice and <br />recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variances <br />upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic <br />conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values <br />of property in the surrounding area. <br />VARIANCE ANALYSIS: <br />According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: <br />1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The <br />variance would allow the addition to be located 41.7 feet from the street. The intent of the <br />ordinance is to create large separation between the homes and the street. This intent would <br />still be met. <br />2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The setback as proposed would <br />continue to be consistent with the large open spaces suggested by the comprehensive <br />plan for this type of development. <br />3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. <br />a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not <br />permitted by the official controls; The lot size and current configuration of the <br />home do not permit a modest improvement of the home without some <br />encroachment into the setbacks. <br />b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The <br />homeowner did not create the uniqueness himself. The lot was created and <br />principally improved prior to his ownership. Improvements made by the <br />applicant have been made to blend the home into the neighborhood. <br />Page 2 of 6 <br />