Laserfiche WebLink
• » <br />M3-29S4 <br />Oc1»ter]«.2MJ <br />which said land is located.* <br />Sufi dots not find any unique conditions with this tot or structure to recommend <br />variance approval <br />•The granting of the application is necessary for the pceser\ ation and enjoyment <br />of a substantial propeity right of the applicant.” <br />The a/^lcant still has to ability to construct 171 square feet of patio <br />11.The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, <br />comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning <br />Code.” <br />Granting of this varUmce would be contrary to the Intent of the Zoning Code. <br />”The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the <br />applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty.” <br />The granting of this variance would serve as a convenience to the applicant since <br />no demonstrable hardship or difficulty has been shown. The cqsplicant has the <br />ability to construct 171 square feet of additional patio <br />Inncs farConsideffaHea <br />1. Should the applicant be held to the hardcover calculations which allowed the addition <br />in 2002? <br />2. Is there a hardship that constitutes granting a variance to allow 1,000 square feet patio <br />when the applicant has the ability to construct 1 71 square feet without a variance? <br />3. Should the applicant be required to removed all fabric that has since be installed? <br />4. Axe there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br />Staff RecoBncBdallMi <br />rynial of the hardcover variance to allow 1.000 square feet of patio in the 7S-2S0' zone <br />resulting in a hardcover percentage of 26.9% when 2S*/« is required. <br />iw. <br />r j