Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7. That MN Rules Chapter 7080 requires a minimum setback of twenty (20) feet between an <br />individual sewage treatment system (ISTS)' and a building. ' The Structure appears to be <br />approximately twenty-two (22) feet from the private septic system. <br /> <br />8. That'the Applicant has submitted a site plan depicting the Applicant's preferred location, <br />herein attached a,s Exhibit A ' " , ' <br /> <br />9. That Applicant has stated that the Subject Property is approximately one acre, as are almost <br />all the surrounding parcels. <br /> <br />10. That the Applicant has stated that the neighborhood's essential character is one which <br />almost all homes have been built in ways to maximize tree preservation. <br /> <br />11. That the Applicant has stated that City Code is intended for much smaller, conventional <br />quarter acre lots. City Code ~117-349 (Accessory Uses and Buildings) states that any <br />, accessory building must be located in the side or rear yard on parcels less than two acres. <br />The City finds that City Code was not intended for smaller lots as referenced by the <br />Applicant, and applies to the Subject Property. ' <br /> <br />12. That the Applicant has stated that the'rear of the Subject Property has always been low- <br />lying land and will occasionally collect water. The City finds that it appears that the change <br />in grade in the rear ofthe SubjectProp~w is approximately four (4) feet.' <br />, ' <br /> <br />13. ' ' That the Applicant has stated that the Variance is needed to preserve several 60-70 year old, <br />mature, and highly desirable red oak and cedar trees. The Applicant states that'removal of <br />these trees harms the essential character of the neighborhood, reduce the property value of <br />the Subject Property, and would not be appreciated by adjacent neighbors. <br /> <br />, 14. The Applicant has stated that the Variance is needed due to the location of the current <br />residential dwelling unit, set back close to the rear property line, as' are many other <br />structures on adjoining properties. The Applicant has further stated that the Structure would <br />be more visible to adjoining property owners if the Structure were located in the rear yard. <br /> <br />'15. That the Applicant has stated that the Variance is needed because the Subject Property is <br />almost completely (90%) screened on all sides by existing younger Cedar, Oak, and <br />evergreen trees; The Applicant has stated that if built as proposed,' the Structure should be <br />minimally visible and existing and future tree plantings will screen the structure from all <br />neighbors even more effectively than existing foliage does now. <br /> <br />'16. That the Applicant has stated that the Structure will be built to match existing siding <br />(HardiPlank) and roofmg (GAF Weather-Wood) of the existing residential dwelling and the <br />color of the siding (HardiPlank Khaki) will blend in well with three":'tone colors of <br />surrounding foliage to make the building unobtrusive. ' <br /> <br />17. That the Applicant has stated that the Structure will be able to house/store maintenance, <br />tools, mowers, repair block, 'etc. that are now stored outside as the Applicant currently has <br />no place to store these items. <br /> <br />RESOLUTION #10-02-_ <br />Page 2 of7 <br /> <br />,50 <br />