My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
11/13/2002 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2002
>
11/13/2002 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2014 3:22:34 PM
Creation date
6/6/2014 1:21:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
11/13/2002
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.
/
48
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
Planning & Zoning Board <br />September 11, 2002 <br />Page 5 <br />• would be within the allowable size and number of accessory building allowed on a lot of <br />this size and zone. <br />Staff noted that at least one neighboring property contains a garage which is sited closer <br />to the street (8025 Wood Duck Trail). <br />Staff stated the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance states that "in considering all requests for <br />variance or appeal, and in taking subsequent action, the City shall make a finding of fact: <br />1.) That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions <br />allowed by the official controls. <br />Comment: the property as a whole may be put to reasonable use, but official controls <br />preclude the construction of a garage (which is a requirement under the Zoning <br />Ordinance) in the only workable location that is near the house. <br />2.) That the plight of the landowner is due to physical circumstances unique to his property, <br />not created by the landowner. <br />Comment: The physical location of the septic tank, drain field, well and pond preclude <br />siting a garage in a location which would satisfy the requirements of the Zoning <br />Ordinance. Such a configuration of elements presents a situation unique to this property, <br />although this situation was — at least in part — created by the (previous) landowner. <br />3.) That the hardship is not due to economic considerations alone, and when a reasonable use <br />for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. <br />Comment: The demonstrated hardship is the lack of a garage site that would satisfy the <br />requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Such a hardship is not economically motivated <br />but, rather, site driven. While such a hardship still allows for the reasonable use of the <br />property, such a hardship does not allow the property to comply with the requirement of <br />the Zoning Ordinance, which states that all dwellings in a Rural zone should have a <br />double garage. <br />4.) That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege <br />that would be denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same <br />district. <br />Comment: There is no special privilege involved but, rather, a need/hardship that is site - <br />driven. Other properties with similar site constraints would also be valid candidates for <br />a Variance such as this one. <br />5.) That the proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. <br />Comment: The Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance states that a double garage is a building <br />requirement for property located in the Rural zone. Granting this Variance would allow <br />the applicants to comply with this requirement. <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.