pf_03486 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

5.2 The City Planner considered two options to reduce the coverage impact. The first was to expand the driveway at the garage, extending it only to the front of the home. While the second option expanded the driveway in the front yard and straightening out the drive to a 10 foot width north of the home to the garage. However, Mr. Meyer explained that he desires to eliminate an access conflict with a side entry stoop and the need to continually move vehicles when leaving the premises. The driveway is currently at an angle with a width at the front of the home of 10 feet and the rear of the home of 12 feet and the stoop entry encroached 2 feet into the driveway narrowing through access. Mr. Meter added that there are multiple drivers in the home and maneuvering vehicles to allow others to leave the premises is a continued problem. After further site review and listening to Mr. Meyers reasoning, the City Planner concluded that the two options were unreasonable and impractical. 5.3 Staff has reviewed the proposal and explanation submitted by Mr. Meyer and determined that there are no reasonable options available that reduce or eliminate the variance, without reducing the usefulness of the driveway. 5.4 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. 5.5 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" PF3486 - ReA 061603 - Page 3 of 5