Laserfiche WebLink
8.0 REVIEW OF PROPOSED VARIANCE <br />8.1 Section 1005.01 (Business Parking Setbacks) of the City Code requires parking areas to <br />be set back at least 1 S feet from a property line adjacent to a street right-of-way, whereas <br />the proposed parking area is only 5 feet from the property line adjacent to the Alta Vista <br />Drive/Dale Street right-of-way. <br />8.2 Section 1104.05 of the Code states: "Hurdship: Where there are practic�il difficulties o� <br />undue hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this Code, <br />the City Council shall have the power, in a specific case and after notice and public <br />hearings, to vary any such provision in harmony with the general purpose and intent <br />thereof and rreay impose such additional conditions as it considers necessary so that the <br />public health, safety and general welfare may be secured and substantial justice done.. " <br />8.3 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6(2) provides authority for the city to "hear requests,for <br />variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict <br />enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the <br />individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is <br />demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the <br />ordinance. `Undue hardship ' as used in connection with the granting of a variance <br />means the properry in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to <br />circumstances unigue to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if <br />granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations <br />alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the properry exists <br />under the terms of the ordinance ... The board or governing body as the case may be muy <br />impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect ". <br />8.4 The propert ��question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions <br />allowed bv the official controls: The applicant has experimented with different parking <br />lot configurations that met the setback requirements, but found that parking spaces would <br />have to be eliminated — possibly necessitating a different variance — and that the <br />incoming traffic would be routed close enough to the building entrance to be potentially <br />dangerous to the residents. The Planning Division has determined that the property <br />can be put to a reasonable use under the official controls if a vA[ua1vCE is approved. <br />8.5 The nli�ht of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the propertv not created bv <br />the landowner: The unique conditions on this parcel relate to the fact that the eastern <br />property line is angled and that the property is bounded by unusually wide rights-of-way. <br />The property was created as part of the 1876 Asylum Out Lots plat, but since staff has <br />been unable to locate a copy of the plat in City or County files no determination can be <br />made regarding whether this is the original shape of the properiy or whether additional <br />right-of-way was dedicated over time. But even though the proposed encroachment could <br />perhaps be eliminated by vacating some of the right-of-way, there would be no guarantee <br />that a vacation request would ultimately be approved or that all variance conditions <br />would be eliminated. The Planning Division has determined that the plight of the <br />landowner is due to unique circumstances not created by the landowner. <br />PF08-017 RPCA 060408 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br />• � <br />