1998 Planning Commission Packets

Home Browse Search

Blacktop Paving of MN Variance Request Planning Case No. 539 -98 December 2, 1998 Page 2 Staff, on routine inspections in this neighborhood, observed a fresh driveway expansion clearly too close to the property line, at which time it was discovered that no permit had been obtained. Staff contacted the property owner, Ted Jarvis, who provided the name of the contractor -- Blacktop Paving of Minnesota. While the contractor did arrange to obtain and pay for a building permit upon notification by City Staff, repeated attempts to resolve the encroachment issue were not successful until November 10, 1998, at which time the development application was received. All correspondence is attached for the Commission's reference. Analysis: According to Section 1104.01, Subdivision 4c(1)(a), recently amended by Ordinance 620, driveways shall be located no closer to a property line than one foot, provided the adjoining neighbor grants permission for such encroachment. The affected neighbor -- Jennifer Kordiak -- residing at 2228 Hillview Road, had not granted permission at the time the driveway was installed. Ms. Kordiak has since provided the City with an executed form indicating her permission to allow a driveway within five feet of her property. Variance Criteria: The criteria for granting a variance are stated in Section 1125.02, Subd. 2 of the City Code. There are seven standards which need to be met in order to justify the Board of Adjustments and Appeal's granting of a variance. The Codes of this City have been put into place to ensure the orderly growth and development of the community while simultaneously protecting the health, safety, general welfare, comfort and repose of the residents. To deviate from these Codes, there must be a compelling reason to do so. There must be a hardship applicable to the property or situation that has not been created by the applicant. In other words, a hardship situation is present when the strict application of the Zoning Code makes reasonable use of the property impractical. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship. Each of the criteria are listed below with a short response in relation to this particular variance request. 1. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to this property which are out of the owners control: There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that would prompt the granting of this variance. This criterion cannot be met. 2. Literal interpretation of Code would deprive applicants rights commonly enjoyed by others in the same district: When permits are issued for the installation of driveways, the plans are reviewed to ensure that all work performed will conform to the Codes of the City. The strict application of the Code is consistently and uniformly done without any deviation. Had the contractor or resident applied for the building permit before starting the work, they would have been informed that what they proposed was not allowable. This criterion cannot be met.