CCAgenda_04Dec8 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

f) That the variance will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. The Planning Commission finds that the variance will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. g) Whether the shape, topographical condition or other similar chazacteristic of the tract is such as to distinguish it substantially from all of the other properties in the zoning district of which it is a part, or whether a pazticulaz hardship, as distinguished from mere inconvenience to the owner, would result if the strict letter of the Chapter were carried out. The Planning Commission finds the property, while not unique in the neighborhood, belongs to a group of Falcon Heights homes that unlike other homes in the one family residential zone enjoy access to a commons, or greenbelt, which provides a visual and spatial buffer or open space between homes over and above the buffer that a setback requirement is designed to provide. If this jointly owned commons area was divided equally between abutting properties, the rear lot of 2135 Hoyt might be increased an additional twenty feet. Furthermore, homes adjacent to the commons are oriented so that the principal living areas face the commons, not the street. h) Whether the variance is sought principally to increase financial gain to the • owner of the property, and to determine whether a substantial hardship to the owner would result. from a denial of the variance. The Planning Commission finds these variances are not sought to increase financial gain to the owner of the property. The Planning Commission finds that a hardship would be imposed by denial of the variance on rear yard setback, in that the residents would continue to be unable to take optimum advantage of their location on the commons. i) Whether the conditions which give rise to the application for the variance arose after the adoption of this Chapter of the Code of the City of Falcon Heights or any amendment thereto which placed the tract in a zoning District different from what it was under the Chapter. In the consideration Of this item, the City shall make diligent inquiry as to all changes in the property and shall refuse to grant the variance if the problem is one that can be solved through a proper application of a conditional use permit or an amendment of the Zoning code. Financial hardship shall not be a basis for the granting of a variance when the owner purchased the property in reliance on a promise that a variance would be granted, and the City shall dismiss the appeal if it shall appear that the property was purchased on such reliance. • 5)