08-02-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. e amount of space available due to the wetlands present. The special conditions in 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. to others in the same district. Although there have been many variance requests for e. That the variances requested are the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. r the building setback and the thirty-five (35) foot variance for the parking lot is the minimum amount that would allow f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. trimental to the purpose of this Title unless it is determined that nough of a hardship is present to justify a ten (10) foot building setback and five (5) 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 sed building and parking lot expansion should not result in any of the above- cited adverse effects. It will need to be determined whether or not the rerouted storm The applicant is proposing an extremely large building on a site that has limitations on th this situation are the result of the applicant’s proposal of a 120,000 square foot building that will hold five rail cars. Granting the variance would confer upon the property owner a special privilege denied reduced building and parking setbacks, there are very rare cases in which there are such extraordinary circumstances that it would justify such large variances (setbacks would be reduced by 75% and 88%). Although, due to the amount of wetlands on the property, the Planning Commission may feel there could be justification to this request. The applicants state that the thirty (30) foot variance fo them to have the size building needed and add additional parking spaces. The variance may be de e foot parking lot setback. Due to the size of this property, it is hard to justify these severely reduced setbacks. endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The propo water drainage would be adequate and not create drainage problems for the area.