05-19-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I Leon Variance Planning Case No. 553-99 May 19, 1999 • Page 2 Analysis: As with any variance application, for the Planning Commission to act favorably, there must be a demonstrated hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property which makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or even restrictive to a property owner. State statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The individual criteria, with responses, are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. Staff could not discern any exceptional circumstances applicable to this property. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. • While the literal interpretation of the Code would not prohibit the property owners from building a porch, because of the setback requirement, the porch could only be seven feet deep. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The variance request is the result of the applicants' desire to construct a three season porch. d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. While three-season porches and other like living space additions are allowed in this district and are a desirable property improvement, not every property has room to accommodate such an expansion, especially in a side yard. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The property owners wish to replace an existing deck with the porch. If the porch were to • be constructed observing the proper setbacks, it would only be seven feet deep--not enough room for a table and chairs.