My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3.1. BASR 08-20-2003
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Board of Adjustments
>
BOA Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
08-20-2003
>
3.1. BASR 08-20-2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/19/2015 11:03:48 AM
Creation date
8/19/2015 11:03:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
BASR
date
8/20/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
Memo to Board of Adjustments/V 03-01 <br /> August 20,2003 <br /> Page 2 <br /> • applicant is proposing a 240 square foot addition to an existing residence.The addition <br /> would square off the living space.The addition would allow the applicant to expand an <br /> existing 5'X 5' (25sf.) bathroom,heat and air condition living space that is not currently <br /> heated or air conditioned and enlarge a pantry into a dining area.The proposed expansion <br /> would not be any closer to the shoreline than the existing house.The house is setback 65 <br /> feet from the shoreline. <br /> Analysis <br /> In order to grant a variance from the literal interpretation of the ordinance,the following <br /> five conditions must be met: <br /> 1. Literal enforcement of the ordinarxewill cause undue hardship. <br /> Literal enforcement would not allow the applicant to modernize his home <br /> 2. The hardship is causal by special conditions and circumstances,which are peculiar to the property and <br /> the structure intoked and which are not characteristic of or applicable to,other lands or structure in the <br /> same area. <br /> The house was originally constructed in 1971 prior to the current setback requirement. <br /> 3. The literal application of the provisions of this ordmanawould deprite the petitioner of rights enjoyed by <br /> • other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance. <br /> Other residences have the ability to provide modern,heated living spaces. <br /> 4. The special conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the petitioner's omen action or inaction. <br /> The placement of the house 65 feet from the shoreline was not an action of the <br /> petitioner. <br /> 5. The zariamcewill not be injurious to or adzersely affect the health,safety orzeelfare of the residents of the <br /> city or the neighturlax d zwhere the property is located and will be in keepingwith spirit and intent of the <br /> cmdinarom <br /> The request would not adversely impact other properties in the vicinity. <br /> Shoreline variances are also subject to the following criteria: <br /> 1. The strict enforcement of the land use controls will result in an wmaessary hardship. <br /> The denial of this variance would not allow the applicant to modernize his residence. <br /> 2. Granting of the'Luriamce is not contrary to the purpose and intent of this division. <br /> • <br /> S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2003\V 03-01 Knutsen\V03-01PC 8-20.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.