My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PC Packet 09.24.20
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Agendas/Packets
>
2020 PC Packets
>
PC Packet 09.24.20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/25/2020 3:49:29 PM
Creation date
11/25/2020 3:38:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
9/24/2020
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
94
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Grundhofer's Site Plan, CUP Amendment, & Variance <br />Page 3 <br />C. Variance <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 />Staff used the standards outlined in Section 90-38 of the City Code and found the following: <br />(1) Law. The variance as requested is permissible by law. <br />The proposed variance is permissible by law. <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 />a. Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable <br />manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance and, <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 />b. Unique Circumstances. The plight ofproperty owner is due to circumstances unique <br />to the property not created by the landowner and, <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 />c. Character of Neighborhood. The variance, ifgranted, will not alter the essential <br />character of the neighborhood. <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 />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 <br />adding an addition to the existing building. The location of the existing buildings make it <br />infeasible for the addition to meet side yard setback requirements while maintaining operation <br />efficiency on site. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.