09/02/10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE # REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDING NEARER THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE THAN THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE AT 16151 OLIVINE ST NW; CASE OF COLIN AND LAURA HOGUE By: Tim Gladhill, Associate Planner Background: Section 117-349 of the Ramsey City Code states that on properties less than two (2) acres in size, no accessory building shall be constructed nearer the front property line than the principal structure. The Applicant has applied for a variance to construct a detached accessory building nearer the front property line than the principal structure on the property at 16151 Olivine St NW. Observations: The Subject Property is roughly 1.72 acres in size and thus, any detached accessory building shall be constructed in the side or. rear yard. However, the Applicant has stated that due to topography, screening concerns, preservation of trees and access constraints to an existing shed, the accessory structure is proposed to be located in the front yard. The structure is approximately twenty-six (26) feet by twenty-six (26) feet, which equates to 676 square feet. There is an existing 24 ft. by 18 ft. [432 square feet] and a 24 ft. by 24 ft. [576 square feet] detached accessory structure for a total of 1,008 square feet of existing accessory structure. space. If the proposed structure is constructed, the total square footage of accessory structure space for the Subject Property would be 1,684 square feet, well under the permitted 2,400 square feet permitted for parcels of this size. It appears that the structure would be forty (40) feet from the front (west) property line and fourteen (14) feet from the side (north) property line. The proposed structure appears to have sufficient setback to the private septic system (Building Code requires 20 foot setback to drain field and 10 feet to tank), as the septic is located in the rear yard. The Applicant has stated that existing trees help screen view of the proposed structure from adjoining properties and the right-of-way. However, City Code states that accessory structures on lots of this size shall be located in the side or rear yard regardless of screening. Similar to a recent approval, City Staff recommends including a provision that the screening will be maintained at all times as drafted in the proposed variance. Per the direction of the Board, City Staff attempted to measure the slope on the north side of the driveway. It appears that the grade of the lot drops between two (2) to three (3) feet over a range of ten (10) to fifteen (15) feet for a maximum slope of 30% and a separation from the property line to the change in grade of sixty feet, which includes an area of trees and an existing garden. The change in grade appears to be consistent with contour data available. City Staff understands that FHA does not allow a driveway slope in excess of 10%. At the August 5, 2010 Board meeting, a motion to adopt findings of fact favorable to the Applicant carried a 3-1. vote, a majority of, the members present, but not a majority of sitting members. Staff reviewed the necessary votes required to pass a resolution with the City Attorney, who has determined that a majority of votes of the sitting members to pass a resolution is a City Charter requirement that only applies to City Council. MN Statutes require that all ordinances require a majority of sitting members; however, findings of fact are passed by resolution. The City Attorney has stated that the Board shall consider that resolution passed. Any Board member may motion to amend the approved motion. Therefore, the only action required is to consider the resolution in regards to the permit issuing the Variance. As a reminder, the Board of Adjustment is acting in a quasi-judicial capacity. Unlike the Planning Commission, the Board of Adjustment is not a recommending body, rather is deciding on approval or denial of the Variance,