pf_03478 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

5.3 Section 1013.02 states: Where there are practical difficulties 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. 5.4 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 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 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 unique 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" 5.5 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 reviewed the existing (immediate) site conditions, adjacent property situations, and the submitted proposal to determine whether there is a reasonable alternative/solution that would alleviate the need for the requested variance. Based on our review we have determined that without a variance the porch addition could not be built. We further conclude that construction a three season porch is a reasonable request that adds living options to the Laur home. Based on our analysis of the situation the Community Development Staff has determined that the property can be made more livable and put to a reasonable and practical use under the official controls, if the variance sought is granted. B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner: The 11,040 square foot parcel is slightly over the current minimum size required by the City Code, which affords a normally adequate amount of impervious coverage. However, the Laurs constructed an in- ground pool prior to the Code change limiting residential parcels to 30% impervious coverage. That being said, the Laurs have no options, and are currently unable to make any improvements to their home without either reducing impervious coverage or obtaining a variance. The Community Development Staff has determined that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and the regulation, not created by the landowner (site improvements prior to code change). PF3478 - ReA 06/16/03 - Page 3 of 5