Laserfiche WebLink
PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM <br />LA24-000043 <br />1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. <br />Response: Yes. His Home. <br />2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. <br />Response: The circumstances are pre-existing conditions created by the previous Owner. <br />3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. <br />Response: The property will be the Owner’s new Home. The existing structure was built at a time when the setbacks were less restrictive. The <br />resulting Home will be designed to be in harmony with other Homes in the neighborhood. Because the Lot is of similar size than the adjacent <br />properties, the Home will be of similar size and height. The resulting square footage of the Home will be less than new home construction if this home <br />was torn down and rebuilt. <br />4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of <br />the Zoning Chapter. <br />Response: Not being able to build over all the footprints significantly limits the total living space for the Home. Because majority of the existing <br />Garage is not located in the require setback, adding over that structure is not a reasonable variance request. The proposal calls to demo the existing <br />Garage and tunnel. The Garage will be rebuilt within the required Setbacks and attached to the existing House. The Home will get a new Main, front <br />Entry, creating a more welcome front façade. The new First Floor footprint allows for a Second Floor addition above and a typical 4-bedroom (Primary <br />Suite and 3 Children’s Bedrooms) Home. <br />5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall <br />be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this <br />Chapter. <br />Response: Building over the existing footprint of the Home is a practical structural addition. If the existing non-conforming area at the north side and <br />Lakeshore were denied, structurally it is more difficult and more expensive to build. The resulting Second floor area would be reduced. The roof and <br />floor loads must be transferred to beams that also places unique stress on the existing foundation that must also be then renovated. Construction cost <br />increase for a smaller Home in comparison to normal construction techniques. <br />6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter <br />for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. <br />Response: The Impervious Hardcover requirement also has practical difficulties. Tearing down the existing, non-conforming Garage remedies the <br />setback requirement. Doing so creates a longer driveway and additional hardcover. Our Proposal redistributes the current hardcover areas to make this <br />configuration practical. To meet the Impervious Coverage requirements, we would be required to remove the walkway into the House, most of the back <br />deck or patio, eliminate the entry walk and remove a large portion of the driveway. All these are major hardships. You have to be able to get into the <br />front door of your Home! You have to be able to drive your car into your Garage! The House is on a Lake, it is not unreasonable to have a deck or patio <br />on that side of the property! We are not proposing to increase the current hardcover areas, only to reduce the existing quantity. <br />7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. <br />Response: This is a One-Family Home and will remain. <br />8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining <br />property. <br />Response: They do not affect the neighbors immediately adjoining this property. <br />9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. <br />Response: Correct <br />10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. <br />Response: You have to be able to get into the front door of your Home! You have to be able to drive your car into your Garage! The House is on a <br />Lake, it is not unreasonable to have a deck or patio on that side of the property! We are not proposing to increase the current hardcover areas, only to <br />reduce the existing quantity. <br />11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be <br />contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. <br />Response: Correct <br />12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable <br />difficulty. <br />Response: Correct <br />52 <br />PC <br />Exhibit C