HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-05-29 Setback Variance Request & Planner Memo For Garage Construction - Approved / 7- 73
't .
VILLAGE OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS n/IINNESOTA
APPLICATION FORM
NOTE TO APPLICANT: FILL IN OR CHECK ONLY THOSE ITEMS PERTAINING
TO YOUR REQUEST. REVIEW PROCEDURE DATA SHEET.
(TYPE OR PRINT)
I. GENERAL DATA
I NAME OF APPLICANT / .1 a `b...1 F �e#5
/
2 ADDRESS 445/4j __ 5/• sT At, c5✓ �/%49 '�cZZ , �'V/ . .6-so?2
3 $3%-31/-95-- HI NAME RTY OWNERS ` #,- `/` 1--ka g
' II. SITE DATA
LEGAL BOUNDS ATTACH(IF MEETS LOT BLOCK r PLAT /a� ,//�
I AND BOUNDS ATTACH TO APLN.) n�G !' r(JIiKe((�[
S
2 SITE AREA (IN SQUARE FEET OR ACRES)`(�4 Qg#il 3 I ZONING T �Q.I� JT/9 �_
4 EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY / ("U71
III. TYPE OF APPLICATION
LANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I CONCEPT I $ 76 I GENERAL PLAN I IS 100 I
REZONING I 5 45 VARIANCE 5 5 V1 SPECIAL USE PERMIT I $ 46 I
• AMEND. SPEC. USE PER. $ 50 PLAT Is 60+ VACATIONS- STREET/ALLEY S 10
SIGNATURE - APPLICANT SI URE • /LS 7�
IV. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF use NLY
APPLICATION REC'D -5/q/73 I BY (INITIALS) I DATE PAIED NO
PLANNING REVIEW / DATE
COUNCIL. ACTION I DATE 6////7 3 I APPROVED t� I DENIED
COMMENTS: ...,,e2.&., 4 '/�C� to 7 � .v' /'
;a:7i
cfP0
a /17.evcetxy,ce_ -e..(-- ,Q-A-;6 ("a/a 'a-Q.1 --"I 7/0,4.<
, )7. c rcQ- -e- ca.--.0 >, o
6149 -e-ee,,,a. 7 fcd- 5r---7-7-c---- ''6e- jc",11 /1
..14÷ w •
5-72
i
�.l
gib , ?,
•
/'1
• /7 _ 73
June 11, 1973
NASON associates
Memo To: Oak Park Heights Council WEHRMAN roy a.anderson
CHAPMAN john o.bergly
ASSOCIATES richard d.fredlund
From: Otto Schmid, Planner INC charles a wittenberg
planning
Subject: Variance Request - Richard J. Hughes engineering
14541 57th Street North landscape architecture
The applicant is requesting a side yard setback variance to allow the construction of a
two (2) car attached garage to the east side of the existing dwelling.
The following observations of the situation are provided for your review.
1 .) The applicant is presently without any type of garage.
2.) Topography is such that the placement of a garage to the rear of the home would
prove impractible.
3.) Attaching the garage to the rear of the home would appear to be disruptive to
existing floor plan.
4.) One neighbor has indicated no objection to the proposed garage.
5.) If the waiver request is granted, there would still be a minimum of 15 feet between
proposed garage and home to the east.
As the state law and local zoning ordinance states, a variance in order to be granted, must
be based on a hardship and the hardship is not to be considered an economic one. In this
case, it is our opinion that justification exist for the construction of a garage.
The question arises as to the size of the proposed structure as it relates to the magnitude
of the waiver request. The required setback to a sideyard is 10 feet. The applicant pro-
poses to construct a 24 x 24 garage allowing for a setback of 3 feet at the southeast corner
and 6 feet at the northeast corner.
Although the garage is larger than average, we feel the several feet difference would no'r
gain appreciable distance to warrant a change. However, as is the case with most waiver
requests, the action taken by the Council can be viewed as a presidence in this neighbor-
hood.
offices in minneapolis and fargo-moorhead—phone 1-612-546-4303-1415 lilac drive,minneapolis,minnesota 55422