02/04/10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

, 18. That the Applicant has stated that the Variance is warranted because, as indicated on the lot survey, the proposed location is the best location to build tl1e Structure as it. is well drained, preserves mature trees, and should be minimally visible from aily neighbor's lot. 19. That the Applicant references a variance approved for' Lot 15, Bowers Missis.sippi Acres, reserving easement over the rear ten feet for public utility, Anoka County, Minnesota. That variance was approved due to a hardship created by the Wild and Scenic Overlay District . and the Mississippi River Critical Area Overlay District, as documented by Findings of Fact #0828, adopted by City Resolution #08-07-118, herein incorporated as reference. The , Subj~ct Prope"fty is not located In any overlay district. 20. That the Applicant references a variance approved for Lot 2, Block 7, Hall-Anderson Acres, 'subject to the easement. as. shown on plat, (subject to easement grant 4-2-74), Anoka County, Minnesota. This variance was granted to exceed a ten foot sidewall height res:triction as documented by Findings of Fact #0829, adopted by City Resolution #08-09- 167, herein incorporated as reference. This variance 'was not for a deviation from the setbacks for accessory structure.s, as is the request for the Subject Property. 21. That the Applicant references a variance approved for the parcel generally known as 17725 Nowthen' Blvd NW (PIN #03-32-25-24-0003). This variance was approved due to an existing wetland on the parcel and the steep topography as documents by Findings of Fact #0849 adopted by City Resolution #09-08-164, herein incorporated as reference. The change in grade on this parcel appears to be ten feet from the highest point on the parcel to the lowest point on the parcel. Unlike the request for 11725 Nowthen Blvd NW, the Subject Property does not contain an identified wetlarid. . . . 22. That the minimum front and side yard setback for properties within the R-l RWa1 Developing District are forty (40) feet and ten (l0) feet, respectively. 23. That it appears the Structure will be greater than forty (40) feet from the front property line and at least ten (l0) feet from the side property line, meeting all other setqacks other than being 10cate4 closer to the front property line than that" of the principal structUre. 24. That the total square footage of accessory buildings on the Subject Property will be 1,124 square feet (existing 816 square. foot attached garage and 308 square foot proposed detached accessory building). . 25. That properties between one-half (0.5) acres and one (1) acre in size are eligible for a total of 1,800 square feet of accessory building space. 26. That City requested the Applicant review an alternative location to the east side of the existing garage that has a change in grade of approximately two (2) to three (3) feet (the. "Alternative Location"). The Alternative Area appears to. be able'to meet applicable setbacks. The existing garage has a setback of approximately 60 feet. 27. That the Applicant has submitted a revised site plan in respons~ to the Alternative Location, . herein attached as Exhibit B. RESOLUTION #10-02-_ Page 3 of7 . 51