06-16-2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Longview Estates Variance Report June 16, 2010 Page 3 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. If this property were not located in a wetland district, the applicant would be able to develop it into more lots. The applicant is at a disadvantage to subdivide the property as other landowners might because the property is in a wetland district and subject to additional regulations. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant cannot control the fact that his property is in a wetland district. The city adopted wetland zoning regulations in 1982, after the Harstads bought this property and after ten sewer and water pipe stubs were installed. d. That granting the variance requested would 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. Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special privilege in that most property owners do not have to work with these wetland district requirements. In addition, every property owner has the right to apply for a variance to improve the function of their property. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow for lots 13 feet to 35 feet narrower than the minimum width required by the city code in order to be able to use the ten utility stubs that are already in place for this property. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. Approval of this variance request would not be materially detrimental to the Code or to other property in the area. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The requested variance should not cause any adverse effects. The proposed 10-lots would be the same density as the homes across the street and should not negatively affect the wetlands or storm water drainage in the area.