Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. < <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />.<-) <br />, <br />, <br /> <br />/-"', <br />I ) <br /> <br />This ordinance is enacted for the following purposes: <br />. To promote the character of and preserve and enhance the properties and <br />areas within the City including wetlands, ponds, and marshes. (Section <br />1,8,2) <br />. To fix reasonable standards to which buildings, structures and land shall <br />conform for the benefit of all.(Section 1,8,7) <br /> <br />The stated purpose of the R-2 Single and Two Family Residential District is as <br />follows (Scction 5,D,2): <br />1. To establish areas for the development of single and two family housing at <br />a maximum density of approximately five units per net acre. <br />2. To reserve development areas for single and two family housing. <br />3. To restrict encroachment of incompatible uses. <br />4. To maintain density limitations. <br />5. To take advantage of municipal utilities. <br />6. To preserve open space. <br /> <br />Yes. The variance requested appears to comply with the stated Purpose and Intent <br />of the City's Zoning Ordinance and of the purpose of the R-2: Single and Two <br />Family Residential District. Due to the unique topography of the lots on the east <br />side of Lake Johanna it would not be reasonable to force the property owners to <br />place their garages behind or attached to the principal buildings, especially since <br />most ofthe lots in this area are very narrow. <br /> <br />3. <br /> <br />Could the property in question be pllt to a reasonable use without the <br />granting of the variance? <br /> <br />& The applicant could continue to use the existing garage in its present <br />location; however, due to the age of the garage replacement would be necessary <br />sometime in the near future. Without a variance the applicant would not be able <br />to construct a new garage and would thus be left without a garage. Single and <br />Two-car garages have consistently been considered reaSonable uses if the <br />applicant has no other option than to apply for a variance for the construction of <br />such a garage. <br /> <br />4. Was the hardship created by the owner? <br /> <br />No. There does not appear to be a building permit for a garage. It appears that <br />the current property owner remodeled the home in 1987; however that does not <br />seem to indicate any addition of a garage. Therefore stafIbelieves that the <br />hardship was most likely not created by the current property owner. <br /> <br />PC #03.22 - PC Report 09/03/1003 - Page 4 of5 <br />