2007-03-14 CC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes March 14, 2007 answer for approving the variance for Lot 6. He indicated there is no clear line stating the variance must be approved or denied. City Attorney Glaser stated the facts concern the road, the proposed home, and the wetlands. He stated that Lot 6 was a legal sized lot; however, unique circumstances exist with overlapping setbacks and floodplain issues. It is not feasible to construct a home farther back on the parcel and the Hanzals have proposed to construct the home in a specified area that requires a variance. Attorney Glaser stated that Council must determine whether a hardship exists for Lot 6 due to the unique circumstances. City Attorney Glaser stated that the contentious issues are whether the variance is an undue hardship or was it created by the Hanzals. Attorney Glaser stated that the Hanzals purchased the property exactly the way it is today. Attorney Glaser also stated that previous law stated that if property is purchased with issues, it is a self-created hardship He stated this law has been since overturned by the Supreme Court. City Attorney Glaser stated that the proposed plat contained five additional lots, and even though the Hanzals bought into the problem, the only way to build on Lot 6 would be to remove the existing home and this creates a hardship. City Attorney Glaser reported traffic was also a stated concern. He indicated the Planning and Zoning Commission felt this could be overcome by proper placement of the proposed home. He stated the vote was 5/2 with two members feeling this was a self- created hardship. City Attorney Glaser reported the conclusion by Planning and Zoning was that a hardship existed that required a variance. He stated the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that conditions be placed on the variance to include: the size of the proposed home be 3,000’ or larger for the purpose of maintaining the value of the adjoining properties, the control to be left with the Hanzals, and the building permit be issued to only the Hanzals. City Attorney Glaser stated the questions before Council are adopting the factual findings, make amendments and if adopted to move to adopt or deny the variance, to approve the rezoning, associated comprehensive plan amendment, and approving the preliminary plat. Mayor Capra stated the variance expires in one year. She explained the applicant would be required to satisfy all building codes within the City. She commented she attended the March hearing as did Attorney Glaser. Council Member Broussard attended the first public hearing. She commented the Commission completed due diligence and all parties were given an opportunity to be heard. Council Member Broussard stated many of the same issues were brought up at both meetings. She stated the Commission listened to comments of residents, discussed and debated the variance in great detail. Page 6 of 13