04-27-1994 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 14, 1994 that there would have to be some fairly drastic reasons as to why the building could not be expanded to the west before he would support the variance request. Gaetke reported that he likes Little Canada, and takes pride in his building. Gaetke felt that expanding the building to the west would be a big mistake, and did not understand why a variance would hurt Little Canada. Gaetke did not believe his being granted a variance required the City to grant one to everyone requesting one. Davison pointed out that granting a variance in this case would set precedent that the City would have to live with. Davison also pointed out that a hardship cannot be economic in nature. Gaetke felt it would be a hardship for Little Canada for him to building anywhere else. Gaetke felt that expanding the building to the north would look the best, and pointed out his plans for fixing up the front of his building. DeLonais pointed out that if the Commission should deny the request, Mr. Gaetke could present his arguments in favor of the variance to the City Council, who would take final action on the matter. DeLonais pointed out the Planner's recommendation that if the City were to approve the request, it should be handled as an ordinance amendment rather than a variance. Gaetke asked the reason for amending the ordinance. DeLonais pointed out the reason is that there is no hardship to warrant granting the variance. Gaetke asked for an explanation of hardship. The City Planner replied that a hardship is something that would deprive a property owner of the use of his or her property. In this instance, the property is being used, therefore, it is difficult to say there is a hardship as long as there is another option available. Mr. Davison recommended denial of the Northern Air Corporation variance request to allow encroachment into the rear yard setback since there is no hardship 14