My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2007-03-06 Packet
Centerville
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Agenda Packets
>
1994-2022
>
2007
>
2007-03-06 Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2007 12:06:42 PM
Creation date
3/2/2007 12:06:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Members of the City of Centerville Planning Cominission <br />February 28, 2007 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />buildable area for Lot 6. Despite the impact of the unique natural features of Lot 6, the property <br />meets all other City regulations, including the minimum building size. Lot 6 allows for 1,300 <br />square feet at the foundation level. . <br /> <br />2.. 'City of Centerville Variance Requirements. <br /> <br />Under Minnesota Law, variances from the literal provisions of a zoning ordinance may be allowed <br />if "strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the <br />individual property under consideration." Minn. Stat. ~ 462.357, subd. 6. The City's variance <br />application requires that the following conditions must be satisfied in order to grant a variance: <br /> <br />a Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions <br />of the parcel or lot, the proposed variance would relieve an undue hardship, as <br />distinguished from a mere inconvenience, should the applicable ordinance be <br />strictly enforced. <br /> <br />b. The purpose of the proposed variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to <br />increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but would correct <br />extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other <br />property in the vicinity or zoning district. <br /> <br />c. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by the City Ordinance and has not been <br />created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel ofland. <br /> <br />d. The variance will not adversely affect public health, welfare and safety and will not <br />be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. <br /> <br />e. Variances will not be granted that allow a use that is otherwise not a permitted use <br />in the zoning district that the subject property is located. <br /> <br />As discussed above, the Planning Commission found that the Hanzal's initial 20-foot variance <br />request satisfied the last four conditions and in discussing the :first condition requested that the <br />Hanzals attempt to reduce the variance to 10 feet. The Hanzal's amended 10-foot variance <br />satisfies the first variance condition as well as the four other conditions. <br /> <br />a. Because of the Darticular physical surroundin~s. shape or topographical conditions <br />of the ::cel or lot. the proposed variance would relieve an undue hardship. as <br />distin . shed from a mere inconvenience. should the apDlicable ordinance be <br />strictly enforced. <br /> <br />The proposed 10-foot variance would relieve an undue hardship on Lot 6 that is due to the <br />property's natural environmental features. Under Minnesota Statute ~ 462.357, undue <br />hardship means: (1) the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use ifused <br />under conditions allowed by the official controls; (2) the plight of the landowner is due to <br />circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and (3) the variance, if <br />granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.