My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/01/2018
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2018
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/01/2018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:32:00 AM
Creation date
1/11/2019 10:20:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
11/01/2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
148
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular Planning Commission 5. 1. <br />Meeting Date: 11/01/2018 <br />By: Chris Anderson, Community <br />Development <br />Information <br />Title: <br />PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a Variance Request to Allow an Addition to an Existing, Detached Accessory <br />Building Nearer the Front Lot Line than the Home at 17630 Nowthen Blvd NW (Project No. 18-157); Case of <br />Richard and Shirley Watson <br />Purpose/Background: <br />The City has received an application from Richard and Shirley Watson (the "Applicant") for a variance to allow an <br />addition to a detached accessory building to be nearer the front property line than the home on the property <br />generally known as 17630 Nowthen Blvd NW (the "Subject Property"). The Subject Property is approximately 1.70 <br />acres in size and City Code restricts the siting of detached accessory buildings to the side or rear yard of a lot when <br />under two (2) acres in size. The existing building is 728 square feet, and the proposed addition is 728 square feet; <br />the proposed building would be 1,456 square feet. <br />Notification: <br />Staff attempted to notify all property owners within 350 feet of the Subject Property of the requested variance via <br />standard U.S. mail and published the Notice of Public Hearing in the Anoka County UnionHerald. <br />Observations/Alternatives: <br />The Subject Property is zoned R-1 Residential (MUSA) and is surrounded by parcels in the same zoning district, <br />with the exception of the parcel to the northeast, which is zoned Public/Quasi-Public and contains a utility <br />substation. A portion of County Ditch No. 27 traverses a portion of the Subject Property, which results in much of <br />the rear and side yards being within a General Floodplain (floodway and flood fringe designations have not been <br />determined). Without the completion of hydrologic and hydraulic analyses, the General Floodplain is treated as <br />floodway, which prohibits siting new buidlings withihn this area. <br />There is no attached garage on the Subject Property so the existing detached accessory building serves as the <br />primary garage. The Applicant is proposing an addition to the front of the existing detached accessory building, <br />bringing it approximately thirty (30) feet closer to the front property line than the home. However, the minimum <br />required setback in the R-1 Residential (MUSA) district is thirty (30) feet and the proposed addition would still be <br />approximately 100 feet from the front lot line. <br />There are currently four (4) detached accessory buildings on the Subject Property. City Code does limit the number <br />of detached accessory buildings permitted based on the size of a property. The Subject Property is limited to three <br />(3) total detached accessory buildings. However, at the time that the detached garage was constructed (1973), and <br />up until the early 1990s, based on the size (728 square feet), City Code did not consider it an accessory building. <br />Additionally, two (2) of the other detached accessory buildings are affiliated with an in -ground pool that was <br />installed in 1977, well before limits on the number of accessory buildings. Since the request is to add on to an <br />existing building, Staff is comfortable addressing the total number of accessory buildings on the Subject Property <br />as part of this variance request. <br />When contemplating a variance request, there is a three (3) factor test for practical difficulties that must be met by <br />the Applicant. The following are the three (3) factors: <br />1. Is the property owner proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner? <br />2. Is the landowner's problem due to circumstances unique to the property and not caused by the landowner? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.