08-03-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Newman Variance Request August 3, 2005 Page 2 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. The subject property is a typical rectangular shaped lot with no unusual characteristics or conditions. The only extraordinary condition present at the property is the prevailing setback of 48 feet, 18 feet more than what would otherwise be required. 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. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, in that most homes in Mounds View maintain consistent setbacks, whether at 30 feet or 48 feet. Because of this, porch additions or any additions to the front of a home are usually problematic. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The home, constructed in 1951, was situated on the lot to provide maximum backyard area which effectively eliminated the possibility of a front expansion. 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 denied to others in the same district in that the Commission has granted front setback variances for porch additions in the past. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. A six foot front porch which encroaches four feet into the front setback would be the minimum variance necessary to alleviate the Newmans’ perceived hardship. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. The variance would not be detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to the adjoining properties. Given how far back from the street the homes on this block are, a four foot encroachment would not be discernable and would not disrupt the setback pattern for the block. 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 proposed garage addition would not result in any of the above adverse effects.