My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-22-1987 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1987
>
07-22-1987 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2013 2:17:24 PM
Creation date
5/7/2013 2:16:02 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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
Little Canada Planning Commission <br />1 July 1987 <br />Page Three <br />As stated in the Ordinance Section 922.010 C.2.: <br />"A variance from the terms of this Ordinance shall not be granted unless it <br />can be demonstrated that: <br />a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the <br />land, structure, or building involved. <br />(1) Special conditions may include exceptional topographic or water <br />conditions or, in the case of an existing lot or parcel of record, <br />narrowness, shallowness, insufficient area or shape of the property. <br />(2) Special conditions and circumstances may not be primarily economic <br />in nature. <br />b. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive <br />the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same <br />district under the terms of this Ordinance. <br />c. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions <br />of the applicant. <br />d. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special <br />privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structures, or <br />buildings in the same district. <br />e. A genuine hardship exists in complying with the literal terms of this <br />Ordinance." <br />A variance from the established district standards for the site in question, in <br />our opinion does not qualify per the above stated criteria. Per item t'. no <br />special or unique hardship exists other than the use and building need ado not <br />fit the site. The variance would also violate items b and d. Additionally, <br />Section 903.010 A and B of the Zoning Ordinance clearly state that a non- conform- <br />ing use and site are not to be enlarged or expanded, but only to continue as is <br />or be brought further into ordinance compliance. Based upon these considerations <br />plus the number of ordinance deviations involved, we believe the case could <br />establish a major, uncontrollable precedent for future such situations. We there- <br />fore cannot recommend approval of the variance required for this project to proceed. <br />cc: Joe Chlebeck <br />John Palacio <br />Tom Sweeney <br />Don Carley <br />Robert DeBace <br />Page 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.