4d - After-the-fact Variance from Side Yeard Setback

Home Browse Search

COMMUNIT'YGROWTH Glyof I N S T I T U T E Pequot Experls in Small Tower Planning LAd�.S STAFF REPORT Application: Variance for Accessory Structure in Side-Yard Setback Applicant: Thomas Link Agenda Item:3(c) Background Information: The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow an existing garage to remain within the side yard setback. The applicant was issued a land use permit on October 1, 2007 to build a garage and it was built within the side yard setback. A garage had previously existed on the property and was removed prior to the new construction. The garage that had previously existed was nonconforming as it was located within the side yard setback. The new garage was to be built in a conforming location outside the side yard setback. The applicants have indicated that they had originally staked out the area and it had met the setback, however, after it was completed, it was determined to be located within the side yard setback.A survey showing this has been submitted. t � A x. ° yy V lulE :,pq., In August of 2008, the Planning Commission denied an after-the-fact variance that would have allowed the garage to remain in its present location. The Planning Commission cited the following findings of fact in making their decision: 1. The structure, as it has been constructed, encroaches within the side yard setback. 2. The strict interpretation of the Ordinance would not create an undue hardship or be impractical as there is ample room on the property to construct the accessory structure in a conforming location. 3. The deviation from the Ordinance would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Ordinance. The side yard setbacks contained within the Ordinance are intended for such things as fire safety, buffering, maintenance, privacy and Pequot Lakes Staff Report 4(d)-1 March 18,2010