06-19-2006 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

. • � Zoning Application#06-3204 for Chad and Julie Lindbloom Revised Answers to Hardship Application Forn� 5/30/2006 1. Many other properties in the area have been substantially improved witli house additions, outbuildings and other structures.Due to the current sideyard setback from the Outlot C road easement,such improvements are not possible. � 2. The location of septic fields on the North east portion of the property,low and wet lands to the North and West,and topographical and practical plaii considerations to the West and South prevent reasonable improvements o£garage and outbuilding in those areas. The only plausible expansion area is to the East,which is impacted by the existence of the sideyazd setback from � the Outlot C road easement. 3. The locality is characterized by many homes that have been substantially improved but that vary in nature,lmprovements involving living space additions,garage adc3itions,outbuilding additions,and other landscape and recreational enhancements all add to the variety of the area. Further, it appears that some of the homes in the immediate area have conditions similar to those proposed for this property.For example,the detached garage at the property to the North(2675 Fox Street)is 22'from Gander Rd.That property has heavy foliage that minimizes the visibility of the non-conforming condition that is similar to the proposed condition.There are also other properties in the area that appear to have front or sideyard setbacks less than the standard requirement.This lack of unifoi7nity adds to the unique character of the area. 4. The sideyard setback is the condition that prevents reasonable improvements. 5. NA 6. NA 7. NA 8. The existence of the road easement on Outlot C for a possible future road extension is peculiar to the properties bordering Gander Rd.,some of which have existing conditions less than the . requirement.The additional conditions as set forth in paragraph 2(above)are unique to the properiy in question. 9. The existence of the road easement on Outlot C causes the unique condition.Other properties that already have made similar improvements do not generally have the combination of limitations of this property. 10. Without the granting of this variance,the right to unprove this property cannot be exercised. Many of the properties in the area have already exercised this right and have not been limited by the existence or enforcement of the standard setback requirements. 11. Since there are no current plans to connect Gander Rd to Rainey Rd,the enforcement of this setback seems somewhat extraordinary.Even if there were a connection in the future,the unpact on the Community would be extremely lunited since there are very few properties that would be served by it.The fact that other properties in the area have made improvements that are similar to those proposed in this request demonstrates that it is not contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code.Tlie positive affects of the proposed improvements outweigh the affects of the variance approval even if the roads would be connected in the future.