My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCAgenda_04Sep8
FalconHeights
>
City Council
>
City Council Agenda Packets
>
200x
>
2004
>
CCAgenda_04Sep8
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 2:49:34 PM
Creation date
6/25/2009 1:38:17 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
113
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• POLICY Hl <br />9/8/04 <br />Variance request for 647 additional square feet of impervious lot coverage above the <br />amount allowed by code at 1885 Asbury Street (continued) <br />e. That the variance will not impair the orderly use of the public streets; <br />Staff finds that the variance will not impair the orderly use of the public streets. <br />f. That the variance will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety; <br />Staff finds that the variance will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. <br />g. Whether the shape, topographical condition or other similar characteristic of the tract <br />is such as to distinguish it substantially from all of the other properties in the zoning <br />district of which it is a part, or whether a particular hardship, as distinguished from <br />mere inconvenience to the owner, would result if the strict letter of the Chapter were <br />carried out. <br />This property, while not unique, shares the unusual lot-shape constraints mentioned in the <br />• first paragraph of this report with most properties in the blocks bounded by Snelling, Asbury, <br />Roselawn and Crawford. Denial of the variance will certainly impose an inconvenience; <br />hardship is a subjective matter. Of the two alternate options discussed, one would be far <br />more costly to the owner and the other would require the loss of an important outdoor <br />amenity. <br />h. Whether the variance is sought principally to increase financial gain to the owner of the <br />property, and to determine whether a substantial hardship to the owner would result <br />from a denial of the variance. <br />Staff finds that no material or financial gain will occur in the granting of this variance. Staff <br />does not find that a substantial hardship to the owner will result from denial of the variance, <br />because the owner has other options. <br /> <br />is <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.