06-09-1997 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, I statement of Hardship The applicant has provided a list of concerns that may be created if the garage was not replaced at the existing location and required to be located elsewhere on the property. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. 2. 4. 5. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used for residential use without the replacement of the garage. A garage could be constructed elsewhere on the lot, however, it would increase hardcover and possibly impact views. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. i The property is unique due to the topography along the shoreline which originally allowed for a garage to be constructed into the steep slope. The property is also unique because it is a comer lot and a through lot which places additional setback requirements on the south, east, and north property lires. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Replacement of the garage will not change the character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. No cost estimates have been prepared to determine if replacement is more financially feasible than constmcting a garage elsewhere on the property. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not an issue. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. An accessory structure on a through lot is allowed as a conditional use. #2182 Herbert Terry Olson 3640 Bayside Road 5/19/97 page~2