pf07-040 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-- -- 5.8 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6(2) provides authority for the city to "hear requests for variances fi^om the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances whe�°e their str°ict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual properry under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit crnd intent of the ordinance. `Undue hardship ' as used in connection with the g��anting of a variance means the properry in question cannot be puC to a reasonable use if used under conditions allo��ed by the o�cial controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, ��ill not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use fo�� 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 ". 59 The propert ��question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed bv the ofticial controls: For reasons detailed in the preceding paragraphs, Community Development staff does agree that strict adherence to the Code would hinder normal parking and storage of vehicles, RVs, etc., but is unable to understand the hardship that would require excess impervious coverage and therefore does not support the requested variance. Staff believes that the hardship can be relieved, however, with a driveway expansion that maintains a 2-foot setback from the side property line and that is 2 feet shorter than indicated on the site plan submitted for review. The Planning Division has determined that the property can be put to a reasonable use under the official controls if a VARIANCE is approved. 5.10 The pli�ht of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner: Consistent with previous sections of this report, Community Development staff believes that the applicant's goals can be accomplished without a variance for excess impervious coverage, and that any circumstances leading to impervious surface area greater than 30% of the lot would, in fact, be created by the landowner. The existing structures on the property were originally built in 1968, a time that did not anticipate that a typical family would have 3 or more daily-use vehicles. The applicant has only owned the property since 2000, and therefore did not create the driveway that is too narrow to access the garage when additional vehicles are parked in the existing driveway. The Planning Division has determined that the plight of the landowner is due to unique circumstances not created by the landowner. 5.11 The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the localitv_: A driveway expansion like that described in this report essentially mirror the driveway directly across Lydia Drive and would be largely screened from view to the south by the proposed privacy fence. The Planning Division has determined that the allowance of a VARIANCE 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. PF07-040 RVBA 080107 Page 3 of 4