Laserfiche WebLink
4. <br />5. <br />6. <br />I.The 3’ carport encroachment has no impact on neighboring properties, and <br />if reduced to meet the setback would be significantly less functional for <br />its intended purpose. Further, an existing tree line along the east property <br />boundary will minimize the visual impact of the encroacliment on <br />neighboring properties. <br />It would be appropriate to grant the conditional use permit after-the-fact <br />for the structural additions. <br />K.The 1970 conditional use permit discussions and preliminary approval by <br />City Council required a 15 ’ road easement be granted. The survey <br />submitted for the application indicates only a 10 ’ road easement. Planning <br />Commission finds that it would be appropriate to require the applicants to <br />grant the ftill 15 ’ road easement as a condition of the current approval. <br />The City Council has considered this application including the findings and <br />of the community. <br />wrve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessaiy to a leviate a <br />demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property <br />right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the <br />Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br />The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit for the <br />additions to this church which exists by conditional use in a residential zotw *■' <br />—<1 level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and <br />objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br />Page 3 of 7 <br />1