My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-02-1996
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
10-02-1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2018 2:19:36 PM
Creation date
7/31/2018 2:18:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
10/2/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
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
Planning Case No. 459-96: 7755 Spring Lake Road <br /> October 2, 1996 <br /> Page 2 <br /> e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. <br /> Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. <br /> f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other <br /> property in the same zone. <br /> • <br /> g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent <br /> property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger <br /> of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values <br /> within the neighborhood. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may impose such <br /> restrictions and conditions upon the premises benefited by a variance as may be necessary to <br /> comply with the standards established by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of <br /> such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood and to better carry out the intent of <br /> the variance. <br /> Attachments: Planning Application <br /> Zoning Map <br /> Plot Plan <br /> Hardship Statement <br /> Resolution 482-96 <br /> Background: <br /> The applicant is requesting a variance to extend his concrete driveway within 1 foot of the <br /> side property line. He lists several reasons why he feels a variance is appropriate in his <br /> hardship statement. The area between his existing driveway and the property line is too. <br /> shaded to grow grass because of pine trees on his neighbor's property. The area is an <br /> eyesore and requires some kind of surfacing. His property fronts on Spring Lake Road <br /> where parking is prohibited. He wants to expand the existing driveway to provide parking <br /> for guests. Guest parking has been a problem and requires ferrying people from parking <br /> elsewhere in the neighborhood or from the park. The pine trees on the adjacent property <br /> provide a buffer. According to the plot plan provided by the applicant, the neighbor's <br /> house is 80 feet from the side property line. <br /> Staff requested Mr. Manning to contact his neighbor as to whether they would give <br /> permission for a parking area within one foot of the property line. Mr. Manning was not <br /> able to get written permission. Therefore his request is two-fold: <br /> • to reduce the setback from property lines to parking areas regardless of whether <br /> the neighbor gives written permission <br /> • to allow the surfacing to be concrete rather than temporary material <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.