My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10/13/1993 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
1993
>
10/13/1993 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/7/2017 12:17:40 PM
Creation date
7/7/2017 12:19:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
10/13/1993
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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
AGENDA ITEM IV B <br />STAFF ORIGINATOR Mary Kay Wyland <br />DATE October 8, 1993, <br />TOPIC 93-17 Variance, 6619 Ruffed Grouse Road <br />Lot 6, Block 1, Quail Ridge <br />............................... <br />................................ <br />The property in question is located in the Quail Ridge plat and was <br />one of the first building sites built on. When the building permit <br />was issued, a certificate of survey indicated that the garage side <br />of the house was located 5' from the side property line as required <br />by the Zoning Ordinance. However, upon completion of the dwelling, <br />an "as -built" survey indicated that the house was actually 4.3" <br />from the side property line. This encroaches 7" into both the side <br />yard setback and a drainage easement. To provide a clear and <br />unclouded title to the property, the builder is requesting this <br />variance. <br />The property owner & builder, Bill Pierce of Pierce & Associates, <br />is also the property owner of Lot 5, Block 1, Quail Ridge <br />immediately to the west of this subject property. Therefore, we <br />have not asked for a letter from the adjoining property owner <br />indicating no objections. <br />According to Section 4, Subd. 7, "Variances from the, literal <br />provisions of the ordinance may be granted in instances where their <br />strict enforcement would cause undo hardship because of <br />circumstances unique to the individual property under <br />consideration." Staff would recommend approval of this variance <br />request with the following Findings of Fact: <br />1. The property in question cannot be put to use for other <br />than single-family purposes. <br />2. The plight of the landowner (actually the future landowner, <br />as the builder is requesting this variance) is due to <br />circumstancesnot of his making and the variance is necessary <br />to provide clear title to the property. <br />3. The hardship is not due to economic considerations alone <br />and a reasonable use of the property does exist under the <br />terms of the ordinance. <br />4. Granting of the variance will not confer on the applicant <br />any special privilege that would be denied by this ordinance <br />to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.