My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10/10/2001 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2001
>
10/10/2001 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2014 11:55:27 AM
Creation date
6/4/2014 9:36:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
10/10/2001
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.
/
49
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
• <br />• <br />• <br />ANALYSIS <br />An error was made in siting, and the home sits 6.8 feet from the property line rather than <br />the required ten feet. The builder is requesting a 3.2 -foot Variance from the City's <br />required side yard setback of ten feet. The home in question abuts neighboring garages <br />on both sides, rather than the residences. <br />According to the City attorney Bill Hawkins, contractors and homeowners are ultimately <br />responsible for making sure a home is sited according to specifications. Mr. Hawkins <br />further offered the counsel that other Municipalities in similar situations have issued <br />Variances when other remedies for correction were not suitable. <br />FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE <br />In considering all requests for a Variance and in taking subsequent action, the City shall <br />make a finding of fact: <br />1. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls. <br />A Certificate of Occupancy cannot be issued to a property currently in violation of <br />City Code, without a Variance. Re- siting the existing home would be required to <br />correct the violation and meet City Code. This seems impractical for a home that is <br />90% complete, thus a Variance is needed in order to allow reasonable use. <br />2. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique to his <br />property and not created by the landowner. <br />The plight of the landowner is due to a mistake in siting the home. <br />3. That the hardship is not due to economic considerations alone and when a reasonable <br />use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. <br />Reasonable use will require that a Certificate of Occupancy be issued, which will <br />require a Variance. Hardship is exhibited due to difficulty in re- siting a home that is <br />90% complete. <br />4. That granting the Variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special <br />privilege that would be denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or <br />buildings in the same district. <br />The proposed Variance would allow a side yard setback that is less than what is <br />required under City Code. Denial of the Variance, however, would require re- siting <br />a home that is 90% complete. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.