Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Slabiak Report <br />June 7, 2006 <br />Page 3 <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 <br />danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property <br />values within the neighborhood. <br /> <br />The proposed addition would not likely have any impact on the supply of light or air to <br />adjacent properties, nor would it likely impact congestion of streets. The proposed <br />garage would not likely increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety or <br />decrease property values in the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Hardship Summary. For a variance to be approved, the applicant needs to demonstrate a <br />hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation <br />of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists <br />when all of the criteria are met. In review of the above criteria, it is clear that not all of the <br />criteria can be reasonably met. Given that, it would not appear that a variance ion this case <br />would be justified. <br /> <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the property owner and <br />affected neighbors, the Commission can take one of the following actions related to the <br />request: <br /> <br />1. Approve the variance as requested. Staff does not support this action as the review of <br />the hardship criteria appear to not warrant approval. If however the Commission believes <br />hardship is evident, you would need to direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval <br />which clearly outlines the basis of hardship. <br /> <br />2. Deny the variance request. Staff has prepared a resolution of denial based on its review <br />of the hardship criteria which does not appear to justify approval. <br /> <br />3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered <br />or if more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table the request <br />until such information has been provided. Because of 60-day requirements, the <br />Commission would need to act upon the request as soon as reasonably possible to avoid <br />an inadvertent approval. <br /> <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />James Ericson <br />Community Development Director <br /> <br />