Laserfiche WebLink
5 8 November 25, 2014 <br />Page 6 <br />The site currently has 37 parking spaces. A fast food, take out, and convenience restaurant <br />requires 42 parking spaces in addition to the existing uses on site ( 11 parking spaces for a total <br />of 53 parking spaces). Not meeting these criteria fits within the scope of the variance section. <br />Criteria met. <br />2 . Strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because: <br />a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted <br />by the zoning code; <br />The property owners propose to fill an existing vacant portion of a commercial building <br />with a restaurant, which is a commercial use . Restaurant uses have existed in this <br />location in the past . While the nature of the restaurant (intensity) is relat ive ly unknown, <br />the Applicant's statement to "focusing strongly on take-out and delivery", in addition to <br />the 30 seats available for a dine-in experience, lend the need for additional parking. <br />Having a restaurant use in a commercially zoned district is reasonable use of the <br />property. Criteria met. <br />b . The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not <br />created by the property owner; <br />The Property is zoned C-Commercial and is located directly adjacent to a residentially <br />zoned district. The existing buildings and parking lot layout and sizing have been in <br />place for several decades . Restaurant uses have been located here in the past as well. <br />The need for the variance was not created by the property owner. Criteria met. <br />c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and <br />If the variance is granted, the use of the Property as a commercial district will not <br />change. The mixture of uses between commercial (service) type uses and residential <br />uses has existed for several decades. While it is acknowledged that having a restaurant <br />will increase the intensity of the use (as opposed to the existing vacant space), having <br />this mixture of uses promotes the visions of the City by creating a sustainable and <br />walkable environment. The building will not be altered physically in any way (besides <br />new signage) and the overall site and parking layout will remain the same . Criteria met. <br />d. Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. <br />The basis for the practical difficulties is that the parking lot is existing in its current <br />layout and size. It does not appear that economic considerations alone are the basis of <br />the practical difficulties. Criteria met. <br />3 . The variance, if granted, would be consistent with the City's comprehensive land use plan. <br />If the variance is granted the use of the property would remain the same land use as it is today, <br />commercial. The comprehensive plan guides this area for commercial use and the proposed <br />restaurant use will not alter that use . Criteria met. <br />4. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning <br />code. <br />The intent of the zoning code is to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the city and <br />its people through the establishment of minimum regulations governing land development and <br />use. The zoning code is established to : <br />a. Protect the use districts;