2001.05.07 RESO 2001-0022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Resolution 2001- 22 Page 2 The hardship is unique to the property because of the location of existing structures and wetlands. The location of the home, existing storage building, and wetlands limits the area in which to construct the accessory building. The applicant constructed the existing storage building at 95 feet from the property line with plans to construct a larger agricultural building between the storage building and the north property line. At the time the applicant constructed the existing storage building and designed the site plan, the side yard setback was 20 feet. In July of 1999, the City increased the side yard setback from 20 feet to 40 feet. Therefore, the hardship was not caused by the landowner; but rather, a change in the setback requirement. c) The granting of the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. The applicant has attempted to keep the proposed agricultural building as far from the north property line as possible, while maintaining an adequate setback from the existing storage building. Further, the applicant desires to have adequate separation between the two buildings to provide the ability to get equipment, animals, and vehicles around and into the buildings. d) The property can not be put to reasonable use without the granting of the variance. The property is planned and zoned for agricultural use. In order to enjoy a reasonable use of the property, the applicant wishes to construct a reasonable size agricultural building for the storage of hay, horse stalls, and personal belongings. e) The variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the locality in which it would be located. The agricultural pole barn would be 25 feet from the north property line. While the current side yard setback is 40 feet, prior to 1999 the setback had been 20 feet. Therefore, there are numerous locations where buildings are located closer than 40 feet from a side lot line. As such, the reduced setback would not alter the character of this agricultural area. J) The variance, if granted shall not have the effect of allowing, in any district, any use prohibited in the district. The proposed accessory building is a permitted use in the agricultural zoning district. g) The variance, if granted, shall not permit a lower degree of flood protection than required by the ordinance.