10-11-07 Planning Comm. Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(a) That there are special and highly unique circumstances or conditions affecting said property which are not common to other properties in the City and that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable and minimum use of his land. (b) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which property is situated. (c) That the variance is to correct inequities resulting from an extreme hardship limited to topography, soils or other physical factors of the land. After consideration of the Planning Commission recommendations, the City Council serving as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals may grant variances by a vote of a majority of the entire City Council, subject to the finding that a hardship exists according to items (a), (b), and (c) immediately above. Hardship is defined as follows: A situation where property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the conditions allowed by the official controls; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship if a reasonable use for the property exists under terms of the official controls. The Comprehensive Plan guides this entire area for low density residential land uses. The R-1 Zoning District is the City's zoning district that corresponds to the low density residential category. The additional cul-de-sac length does not impact the plat's zoning consistency, which is in all other respects compliant with the R-1 District standards. It is clear from maps of the area that the only way to provide street access to all buildable portions of the applicant's property, as well as to adjoining property to the west as required by the Subdivision Ordinance, a street must extend from Labore Road to the southwest property boundary. Due to wetland locations, there does not appear to be any other option to serve this and other properties with street access. It has been suggested that much of the neighboring land is steeply sloped and is not practical to develop due to extraordinary costs. The relative importance of such costs on development feasibility changes over time. In fact, at least one neighboring property owner has suggested at the Planning Commission that the street in question would be important to permit the subdivision of their property. Moreover, the engineer's reports on the proposed subdivision, with the cul-de-sac as proposed indicate that the development will have a positive impact on drainage in the area by better management the flow of stormwater to avoid areas that currently are subject to occasionally flooding. The City's policy has been to ensure that property owners have the opportunity to make reasonable use of their land, including development. Without the extension of the 2