Laserfiche WebLink
FILE # LA22-000070 <br />Feb. 21, 2023 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />located. This condition is not applicable, as a single-family residence is an allowed use in <br />the RR-1A District. <br /> <br />7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as <br />a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. <br /> <br />8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such <br />property or immediately adjoining property. The special conditions and uniqueness of the <br />lot resulted in variances approved for lot area, width, front yard and side yard setbacks in <br />2021. A new home was built and through an error the constructed deck was built beyond <br />the required setback. The request for a reduced side yard setback to accommodate the <br />larger deck is not an identified special condition justifying a variance. This criterion is not <br />met. <br /> <br />9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the <br />land is located. The Applicant has not identified conditions. This criteria is not met. <br /> <br />10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a <br />substantial property right of the applicant. Substantial property right is provided by the <br />newly constructed single-family home. Expansion of an existing improvement or structure <br />is not a right. This criterion is not met. <br /> <br />11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or <br />morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the <br />requested variances would be contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. <br /> <br />12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is <br />necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The variance to reduce the side yard setback <br />for a deck constructed larger than in the approved plans is a convenience not supported <br />by demonstratable practical difficult. <br /> <br />The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any <br />conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact <br />created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this <br />chapter in the district where such land is located. <br /> <br />Engineer Comments <br />The City Engineer reviewed the as-built survey and did not have any comments. <br /> <br />Public Comments <br />No public comments have been received. <br /> <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)?