07-28-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. M3-M95 July 21.2003 PageOofO "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." Not applicable "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.” There are no special conditions applying to the structure or land that would constitute a variance approval for a deck beyond what has already been approved. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structure.s in the district in which said land is located.” Not applicable "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.” Should the application be denied, the applicant still has the enjoyment of an existing walkout balcony on the lake side of the home. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." The intent of the Zoning Code would not be met should variances be approved beyond the original renewal variances. 12. “The granting of such variance will not merely seive as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable Iiardship or difficulty." The applicant has stated that the deck will serve as a fire escape and improve sight lines. The Planning Commission should discuss whether these needs represent convenience or hardship. StafT does not find any unique hardships to justify a variance for the deck. Issues for Consideration 1 . Does a hardship exist to allow a take side deck? 2. Should the applicant be held to the stipulations of the previous variance approval? 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Denial of both variance requests due to a lack of a viable hardship and the stipulations of the Resolution #4645 which set limits for the property. i J