Laserfiche WebLink
Memo to Mayor and City Council/V 97-9 <br />October 20, 1997 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />The property on which the structure will be located is part of Island View <br />4th Add., a 4 lot residential subdivision approved in April 1997. It is a 8.68 <br />acre lot with frontage on 192nd Avenue ( County Rd. 35).The applicant's <br />house is located on a parcel directly south of the lot on which the proposed <br />structure will be located. The applicant is planning on combining the 8.68 <br />acre parcel with the one that his house is on. Once the lots are combined, he <br />will have a 14.24 acre lot. He has to combine the lots because the lot on which <br />he would like to build the accessory structure does not have a principle <br />structure. If the City Council should decide to grant the variance request, a <br />condition of the approval should be that the lots are combined prior to the <br />issuance of a building permit. <br /> <br />Variance <br /> <br />A variance may be granted only if it meets the following five conditions: <br /> <br />1. Literal enforcement of the ordinance will cause undue hardship. <br /> <br />The hardship is caused by special conditions and circumstances which <br />are peculiar to the property and the structure involved and which are <br />not characteristic of, or applicable to, other lands or structure in the <br />same area. <br /> <br />The literal application of the provisions of this ordinance would <br />deprive the petitioner of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same <br />district under the terms of this ordinance. <br /> <br />The special conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the <br />petitioner's own action or inaction. <br /> <br />The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, <br />safety or welfare of the residents of the City or the neighborhood <br />where the property is located and will be in keeping with spirit and <br />intent of the ordinance. <br /> <br />In his letter the applicant indicates he needs the 50' X 80' pole building to <br />store recreation and construction equipment. He also states that the reason <br />he needs to construct the pole barn is because the soils are not suitable for a <br />conventional stick frame structure. His main point seems to be that the <br />requirements for maximum square feet for accessory structure should be <br />based solely on the size of the lot, not on what the property is zoned. By <br />differentiating between the Rla and the Rlb districts, he feels the residents <br />that own larger lots that are zoned Rlb are treated differently and that is <br />unfair. <br /> <br />\\elkriver\sys\shrdoc\planning\scott\v97-9cc.doc <br /> <br /> <br />