pf07-033 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

--. -� S.S State Statute 462.357, subd. 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 caz�se �rnda�e hardship because of circumstances urrique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping 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 put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances uniqzre to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic 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 The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls: The existing driveway was developed in such a way that no longer conforms to the Code requirements that it be paved and that it lie more than 30 feet from the wetland boundary. The property conforms to Code requirements for lot size and area, allowing a house to be built on the property with only an approved building permit, but the Code does not allow the use of the existing driveway because it is gravel. For this reason, a paved driveway is needed, but there is not a location where a driveway could be built on the property without a variance, nor is it possible to secure an access easement on an adjacent property. Even if other options were available, the gravel driveway would have to be removed, which could have significant impacts on the wetland. The applicant is caught in the proverbial "catch 22" where a new driveway is required but there is no suitable location for a driveway; without an approved driveway, the use the property for a single-family residential dwelling would be prohibited. The Planning Division has determined that the property can be put to a reasonable use under the official controls if the VARIANCE request is approved. 5.7 The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner: The existing driveway was developed by the current property owner to serve the existing house that will stand on a separate property once the property transfer has been completed. The Planning Division has determined that the plight of the landowner is due to unique circumstances not created by the landowner. 5.8 The variance, if �ranted, will not alter the essential character of the locality: The existing driveway is already considered impervious because of the fine grain and compaction of the gravel material, but there is no control of runoff toward the nearby wetland. If the proposed driveway improvement were allowed, sloping of the pavement away from the wetland, in conjunction with other rate- and quality-control measures, would eliminate the existing, negative impacts of the driveway on the wetland. The Planning Division has determined that the allowance of the requested VARIANCES will not alter the essential character of the locality, nor adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare of the city or adjacent properties. PF07-033 RVBA 071107 Page 3 of 4