Laserfiche WebLink
3. The petitioner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the honing ordinance. <br />The petitioner is proposing doubling the size of an already non-conforming structure and also <br />maintaining twice as many allowed accessory structures. <br />4. The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a consequence of the petitioner's <br />o~vn action or inaction. <br />The petitioner has offered no factors indicating uniqueness of the property supporting the <br />variance. The petitioner bought the property with the existing structures, quantity and square <br />footages, as they are. It is unknown what the condition of the subject structure was in 1994 <br />when the applicant purchased the property. The subject structure could have been <br />maintained. It appears that through inaction on part of the petitioner, the use of the garage <br />has been lost. <br />S. The variance, ifgranted, zvill not alter the essential character of the locality. <br />The character of the locality will not be altered if the variance is granted. <br />If the City Council does not approve the ordinance amendment (OA 11-03) they can do one of <br />the following: <br />1. Review the variance request with the current regulations. <br />2. Postpone action until the ordinance is amended. <br />APPLICABLE REGULATIONS (If Council makes no changes to the variance criteria <br />Below are the current regulations for review of the request if the ordinance amendment was not <br />approved. <br />Based on a Supreme Court action in 2010, if a property can be used in a reasonable manner, a variance <br />should not be granted. The property has a reasonable use with the construction and occupancy of a <br />dwelling unit. <br />Variance Criteria <br />7. Literal enforcement of the ordinance avill cause undue hardship. <br />Literal enforcement will not cause undue hardship as the applicant has more accessory structures <br />than allowed by ordinance, even if the proposed building were removed. <br />2. The hardshib is caused b~si~ecial conditions and circumstances, avhich are beculiar to the broperty and the structure <br />involved and avhich are not characteristic o~ or a~blicable to, other lands or structure in the same area. <br />There are no special conditions and circumstances that are peculiar to the property. <br />3. The st~ecial conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the t~etitioner's oavn action or inaction. <br />N:\Departments\Comxnunity Development\Planning\Case Files\Variance\V 11-01 Hendrickx\V 11-01_CC.doc <br />