Laserfiche WebLink
Grundhofer’s Site Plan, CUP Amendment, & Variance <br />Page 3 <br />expand the cooler and freezer areas, the existing meat market will remain the same. The existing <br />conditional use permit allows the meat processing facility to be an accessory use to the meat <br />market. The meat processing facility portion of the site is to remain the same. <br /> <br />It is in staff’s opinion that the applicant meets all of the requirements necessary to approve the <br />CUP amendment for the meat processing facility on the property. <br /> <br />C. Variance <br /> <br />The existing buildings on site are legal nonconforming and the applicant is requesting a variance <br />from the side yard setback requirements in order to add on to the existing buildings. The <br />applicant is proposing a 12 foot side yard setback, where 30 feet is required by ordinance. <br /> <br />Staff used the standards outlined in Section 90-38 of the City Code and found the following: <br /> <br />(1) Law. The variance as requested is permissible by law. <br /> <br />The proposed variance is permissible by law. <br /> <br />(2) Practical Difficulties. The applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical <br />difficulties in complying with the provisions of the zoning regulations. The term “Practical <br />Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: <br /> <br />a. Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable <br />manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance and; <br /> <br />By adding an addition to the existing building, the applicant is proposing to use the <br />property in a reasonable manner. The existing buildings on site do not meet the side yard <br />setback requirements, making a variance request necessary to construct an addition. It is <br />in staff’s opinion that it is reasonable to request an addition to the existing building. <br /> <br />b. Unique Circumstances. The plight of property owner is due to circumstances unique <br />to the property not created by the landowner and; <br /> <br />The property is unique in that the existing buildings on site are legal nonconforming to <br />side yard setback requirements. The proposed addition is restricted in location due to the <br />location of existing buildings and the parking lot. <br /> <br />c. Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential <br />character of the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Other neighboring properties are also legal nonconforming to the zoning district <br />regulations and the proposed setback variance would not noticeably alter the character of <br />the area. <br /> <br />It is in staff’s opinion that there are practical difficulties in meeting side yard setback <br />requirements and the property owner is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner by