PL PACKET 12202011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

It i (C) states that no variance will be granted unless evidence presented supports the following facts, that strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because: The property cannot be put to a reasonable use without the variance. Staff did not find any evidence that a second identification sign would improve the tenant's ability to put this property to reasonable use. It is possible that there may be confusion about the location of the entrance to the clinic,but as time goes on, the exact entrance will become known to the community and the clinic's patients. The circumstances causing the hardship were not created by the owner. The circumstances of the perceived hardship are not of the applicant's making. Staff does agree the architectural design of the front of the building does hint that there may be two (2) separate businesses. The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential characteristics of the locality. The applicant states that adding a second identification sign would not alter the essential character of the locality. Staff feels that since no other business in the Market Place Shopping Center has a second identification sign, allowing a variance to the Sign Ordinance could potentially create a situation that does change the character of the locality. Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the hardship. The applicant admits that adding a second sign is not an economic consideration or the basis of their perceived hardship. Their clinic essentially occupies two (2) units and the frontage looks architecturally different giving the visual sense that there are two (2) businesses instead of one (1). The circumstances causing the hardship are unique to the individual lot. The applicant feels that the hardships that they foresee are unique to the individual site. Their clinic essentially occupies two (2) units and the frontage looks architecturally different giving the visual sense that there are two (2) businesses instead of one (1). The granting of the variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Staff could find no evidence that the applicant's request is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the City's Zoning Code or Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Action: Establish Findings of Fact for this request, based on information and testimony presented by the applicants, the public and staff and pass a recommendation to Council regarding the variance request to the City's Sign Ordinance for a second identification sign. Communications: Staff received one phone call regarding this application and the caller was against the variance request to allow a second identification sign. Attachments: • Application • Written Statement • Elevations • Affidavit of Mailing • 60-Day Extension Letter