Laserfiche WebLink
5.6 The deck proposal calls for 12 holes to be dug for footings on to which posts would be <br />placed to secure the deck structure. This design disturbs far less of the yard and causes <br />minimal impact to the bluff and subsequent shoreline than that of a home addition with <br />footings and a foundation, or an at grade patio. <br />5.5 Section 1013.02 states: where there are practical difficulties or unusual hardships <br />in the ray of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this code, the city <br />council shall have the power, in a specific case and after notice and public hearings, <br />to vary any such provision in harmony with the general purpose and intent thereof <br />and may impose such additional conditions as it considers necessary so that the <br />public health, safety, and general welfare may be secured and substantial justice <br />done. <br />5.6 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6 (2) provides authority for the city to `hear requests <br />for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their <br />strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to <br />the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when <br />It is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of <br />the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used ire connection with the granting of a <br />variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used <br />under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due <br />to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the <br />variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic <br />considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the <br />property exists under the terms of the ordinance.... The board or governing body as <br />the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure <br />compliance and to protect" <br />5.7 The property in question: cannot be put to u reasonable use if used under conditions <br />allowed by the official controls: Given the existing situation, Mr. Badzinski is unable to <br />construct any improvements that expand the existing house footprint including replacing <br />the existing deck, without variances. This structure has existed without any <br />additions /expansions since it was constructed in 1939 (prior to shoreland regulations). In <br />review of the deck request the main impact is that of the encroachment and its proximity <br />to the top of bluff, although there would be an additional encroachment to the shoreline <br />setback. Allowing the construction of a more useable deck would create added livability <br />to the home than currently exists today, but a 16 foot by 16 foot deck is oversized, <br />especially for this home on this parcel. However, staff` would support a reduced deck size <br />of 12 feet by 12 feet which is practical for the parcel and a reasonable design. The <br />Community Development Staff has determined that the property can be made more <br />linable and put to a reasonable and practical use under the official controls, if <br />variances not exceeding 39 feet and 18 feet are granted. <br />PF3540 — RCA 121503 - Page 4 of 6 <br />