2003_0721_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

5.4 Section 1013.02 states: Where there are practical difficuities or unusual hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this code, the city council shall have the power, in a specific case and after notice and public hearings, to vary any such provision in harmony with the general purpose and intent thereof and may impose such additional conditions as it considers necessary so that the public health, safety, and general welfare may be secured and substantial justice done. 5.5 State Statute 462-357, sub d. 6 (2) provides authority for the city to `hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions wil[ be in beeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be prat to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Econonic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance.... The board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect" 5.6 Staff analysis of undue hardship factors is as follows A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls: The Community Development Staff has determined that the property can be put to a reasonable use if the official controls were followed* However, Mr. Gregg has a few options that would reduce the variance. First Mr. Gregg could eliminate the concrete on the east side of the home, estimated at 132 square feet. Next, Mr. Gregg could reduce the size of his concrete patio, currently estimated at 330 square feet, Lastly, Mr. Gregg could reduce the size of the proposed accessory building (storage building) to 20 feet by 24 feet (480 sq. ft.) or 22 feet by 20 feet (440 sq. ft) and reduction of 48 and 88 sq. ft respectively. In total, Mr. Gregg could reduce the impervious coverage from a requested 3,761 sq. ft to at least 3,500 square feet (267 sq. ft variance or .7%). Regunim modifications to the existingr site conditions would reduce im eous coverage impacts, which in this case seems reasonable and practical. o} The City Planner has determined that the property can be made more livable,L PF3494 — RCA 0721 03 - Page 3 of 6