Laserfiche WebLink
FILE # 19-28 <br />May 20, 2019 <br />Page 5 of 5 <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br />property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br />2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the <br />essential character of the neighborhood? <br />3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the <br />impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? <br />4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br />Planning Staff Recommendation <br />The Planning Commission should determine if the standards are adequately satisfied. Practical <br />difficulty appears to be satisfied, and the property on a true peninsula could support uniqueness; <br />Though the need for the variance to support a "substantial property right" fails to recognize that <br />the property has been improved with a single family dwelling, and a dock may be installed on the <br />east side. <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A. <br />Application <br />Exhibit B. <br />Practical Difficulties Documentation Form <br />Exhibit C. <br />Ivy Place Final Plat <br />Exhibit D. <br />Hardcover Analysis <br />Exhibit E. <br />Section 82-256 <br />Exhibit F. <br />Section 78-1370 <br />Exhibit G. <br />Ivy Place Street <br />Exhibit H. <br />Plans provided as part of plat review <br />Exhibit 1. <br />Public Notice Information <br />