3.1. BASR 04-22-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to the Board of Adjustments/V 97-1 Page 3 April 22, 1997 • 3. The literal application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the petitioner of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance. 4. The special conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the petitioner's own action or inaction. 5. The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the City or the neighborhood where the property is located and will in keeping with spirit and intent of the ordinance. Recommendation It is recommended the Board of Adjustment deny Dan Frojd's request for a variance to the 4500 square feet allowed for accessory buildings based on the following findings: 1. The literal enforcement of the ordinance will not cause undue hardship in that the applicant currently exceeds 4500 square foot maximum allowed for accessory structures by 2081 square feet. 2. The applicant must show that the special conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the petitioner's own action or inaction. In this case it is the applicant's choice not to maintain the existing garage but to replace with a larger building. It is his decision to replace the existing garage with a larger building that is triggering the need for a variance. 3. The literal application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the petitioner of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance. The applicant has failed to show that he will be denied rights enjoyed by other properties in the area if he is unable to replace the exiting garage will a larger building. 4. The applicant could maintain the existing garage without the need for a variance. O \\elkriver\sys\shrdoc\planning\scott\v97-1.doc