My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
03/22/2010 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2010
>
03/22/2010 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2014 3:38:32 PM
Creation date
3/21/2014 11:58:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
03/22/2010
Council Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
• Findings: <br />State law requires the following findings to be made in order to grant the approval of a variance. <br />Staff has completed the findings in regards to the submitted request. <br />• <br />• <br />FINDINGS <br />In considering all requests for Variance or appeal and in taking subsequent action, the <br />City shall make a finding of fact: <br />a. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used <br />under conditions allowed by the official controls. <br />While the zoning ordinance requires an accessory structure for all rural <br />properties, the site already is developed in excess of the maximum accessory <br />structure area of 4,200 square feet and exactly the number of accessory <br />structures allowed on the site. <br />b. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances <br />unique to his property not created by the landowner. <br />The restriction of the number and area of accessory structures is directly <br />related to property size. The entire property, whether covered by water, <br />easement, or wetland is used to determine the number and area of accessory <br />structures. Therefore there is no physical circumstance unique to this <br />property. <br />c. That the hardship is not due to economic considerations alone if <br />reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. <br />There is no hardship that staff can identify in this request. The request is <br />based on a desire to overdevelop a site. <br />d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant <br />any special privilege that would be denied by this ordinance to other <br />lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. <br />The city has regularly enforced the accessory structure limitations on <br />property owners, and an approval of this request would confer a special <br />privilege normally denied on other lands. <br />e. That the proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent <br />of the ordinance. <br />The spirit and intent of the accessory structure limitations is to insure that <br />sites are not overdeveloped with outbuildings, and the proposed request <br />would do just that. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.