My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2012/03/12
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
Agenda Packets - 2012/03/12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:55 PM
Creation date
6/26/2018 10:10:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
3/12/2012
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
3/12/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
94
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
8027 Woodlawn Drive Variance Appeal Report <br />March 12, 2012 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />For the City Council to overturn the Planning Commission’s denial, it must find that, in its <br />opinion, a variance is necessary to provide relief to the landowner in those cases where the <br />Code imposes practical difficulties in the use of the property owner’s land. This is true for all <br />variance requests. State statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified <br />criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These <br />criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. A variance may be <br />granted only in the event that all of the following circumstances exist: <br /> <br />a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these regulations. <br /> <br />The zoning code limits the height of buildings in order to maintain visual consistency <br />throughout neighborhoods. Accessory buildings in particular have these limitations so <br />they do not exceed the height of the house, and to limit the uses that could occur in a <br />larger building. <br /> <br />b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />While the Comprehensive Plan does not specify design or size criteria for buildings, it <br />does support improvements to and the maintenance of properties. <br /> <br />c. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by <br />this Title or the City Code. <br /> <br />The applicant owns many things that would be stored in a large garage. <br /> <br />d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in <br />the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other <br />circumstances over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title <br />has had no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the <br />applicant. <br /> <br />This property does not have any unique features. <br /> <br />e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. <br /> <br />The applicant’s neighborhood consists of large, almost one acre size lots, and the <br />applicant has a 2-story house, so the height of the garage is not incompatible with the <br />house, and the overall garage size does not feel overwhelming to the property or the <br />neighborhood. The second garage is behind the front line of both adjacent neighbor’s <br />home and garage.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.