2007-03-06 Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Members of the City ofCenterville Planning Commission February 28, 2007 Page 3 First, the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if required to adhere to the 35-foot setback. In Minnesota a finding of undue hardship requires a "showing that the property owner would like to use the property in a reasonable manner that is prohibited by the ordinance." Rowell v. Board of Adjustment, 446 N.W.2d 917,922 (Minn. App. Ct. 1989). The Hanzals are requesting the variance in order to use the property for a single- family home. Without the variance the lot cannot support a building pad that meets the City's minimum building area of 1,050 square feet. Using Lot 6 for a single-family home is a reasonable use in a single-family zoning district. Second, under Minnesota law, even mere practical difficulties may justify an area variance. See id. A variance from the City's setback regulations is an area variance. See id. The 10-foot variance addresses more than practical difficulties, it allows a reasonable use - a single-family home in the R-2 District. Next, the setback difficulty for Lot 6 is due to circumstances unique to the property. The topography of Clearwater Creek and resulting drainage easement and FEMA Floodway line significantly impact the shape and buildable area for Lot 6. The variance addresses these unique characteristics to allow for a reasonable use on the lot. Finally, the 10- foot variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The Site and surrounding area is zoned single family. The proposed zoning for the HanzaI Subdivision is R-2 Single-Family, which is also the zoning designation to the west ofthe subdivision. The neighborhood across the street is also zoned residential. Based on the above findings, the proposed 10- foot variance satisfies the undue hardship requirements under both the City Zoning Code and Minnesota Statutes. The other four required variance findings are discussed below. b. The purpose of the proposed variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel onand. but would correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this propertY but not applicable to other properties in the vicinity or zoning district. Similar to the undue hardship standards discussed above, the 10-foot variance would address the extraordinary circumstances caused by shape of Clearwater Creek. The topography of the Creek determines the location of the laO-foot drainage easement. The lO-foot front setback variance allows a single-family home in the R-2 District that meets all the other requirements under City Zoning Code. Lot 6 is the only lot in the subdivision requesting this variance. c. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by the City Ordinance and has not been created by anv nersons presently having an interest in the parcel of land. The hardship for Lot 6 is a combination of the impact of the regulations governing Clearwater Creek and the minimum front setback requirements that together limit the buildable area. The 10-foot variance allows a single-family home in the R-2 District.