09/05/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE # REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR PLACEMENT OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE CLOSER TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE THAN THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE; CASE OF ROBERT AND JERALDINE SIBILSKI By: Sylvia Fro!ik, Community Development Director Background: Section 9.11.02 of the Ramsey City Code states that no accessory structure shall be constructed closer to the front property line than the principal structure. Mr. And Mrs. Sibilski are proposing to construct an accessory building closer to the front property line than the principal structure on the property located at 7240 166th Avenue N.W. The following items are enclosed for your information: a) Site location map b) Site plan and applicant's written request c) Proposed Findings of Fact Resolution d) Proposed Variance Resolution e) Proposed Denial Resolution Notification: In accordance with State Statute, Staff attempted to send notification of the variance request and public hearing to all owners of property within 350 feet of the Subject Property. Observations: The subject parcel is 6.2 acres in size and is zoned R-1 Single Family Residential. The front yard setback is 40 feet in the R-1 District of the Rural Developing Area. The principal dwelling is located approximately 343 feet from the front property line. The proposed detached accessory building will be approximately 250 feet from the front property line. The site plan submitted, and an on-site inspection of the site, reveal that a substantial portion of the 6 acres is covered by dense, mature tree growth and wetlands. The Applicant has indicated that compliance with the accessory structure setback requirements would require removal of some of the mature Oak trees (75-100 years old) west of the house. Staff could not confirm this statement, but it did appear that compliance with the setback restriction may be possible with some trimming of the trees. However, another consideration in this case is the fact that the regulation restricting accessory buildings from being closer to the front property line is currently under review and may not be applicable to larger lots in the near future. In the event the Code is amended, the Sibilski's proposal may not require a variance in the near future.