PCAgenda_03May27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

which it is a part, or whether a particular hardship, as distinguished from mere inconvenience to the owner, would result if the strict letter of the Chapter were carried out. Although this site shares vehicle access problems and other characteristics with other properties in the B-3 district, it is distinguished substantially by the existence of the pre-existing shared parking arrangement with the Falcon Crossing shopping center. Variances granted when the shopping center was built are conditional on one of the three lots remaining in possession of the center and the continuation of a shared parking agreement between the shopping center and the owner of the remaining two lots (i.e. the restaurant). It would be difficult, if not impossible, for a viable restaurant to provide for its own parking needs on Lots 3 and 4 alone if the strict letter of the Chapter regarding lot coverage and all setbacks were to be carried out. 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. Staff finds these variances are not sought principally to increase financial gain to the owner of the property. Staff finds that substantial hardship would be imposed by denial of the variance on lot coverage, in that the size of the lot would preclude the owner being unable to satisfy parking requirements if the 25% landscaping requirement were enforced. The same disadvantage would result from the denial of the variance on front setback. It should be noted the existing restaurant is at least as much out of compliance as the proposed restaurant would be, and, in the matter of lot coverage at least, the new restaurant represents some improvement. 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. Not applicable. Comments From Residents: Although the City has received a number of comments from residents, only one addressed the specific variances under consideration here. That resident characterized them as minor. Resident comments on other issues are attached to a separate set of information documents concerned with traffic and other issues not related to these variances. • Staff Report: Dino's Restaurant May 23, 2003 Page 3 of 4