Laserfiche WebLink
'I 8-3634 <br /> June 16,2016 <br /> Page 4 of 5 <br /> 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The eaisting atructure and <br /> proposed addition are associated with reside�ntial use which is consistent with the <br /> comprehensive plan guiding of this aad surrounding properties for residential use. <br /> 3. The applicant establishes that there are pracdcal difficulties <br /> a. The property owner proposes to use the pmperty in a reasonable manner not <br /> permitted by the official controls; The property owner is proposing to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner bnt the specific lot coverage aspects of the <br /> request are not permitted by the Zoning Code; <br /> b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The <br /> plight of the property owner is due to the Northgate Two PRD standards <br /> allowing full use of the lot while the subsequently adopted lot coverage <br /> ordinance does not address such PRD situations; and <br /> c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the lflcality. In the opinion <br /> of stat�' the proposed additions will have no impact on the character of the <br /> ueighborhood, as other hames in the neighborhood have been similarly <br /> developed within the boundaries of their established building pads. <br /> City Code 78-123 provides additional paratneters within which a variance ma.y be granted as <br /> follows: <br /> 4. Econoinic considerations alone do not consdtute pracdcal difficulties if reasonable use <br /> for the properiy exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Economic <br /> considerations are not a faetor in this variance request. <br /> 5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight <br /> for solar energy systems. Variances sha11 be granted for earth sheltered construct�on as <br /> defined in Minnesota Statutes, Secti.on 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in hazmony with this <br /> Chapter. Granting of the varianee will have no impact on solar energy access or <br /> earth sheltered construction. <br /> 6. The Boazd of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any <br /> use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected <br /> person's land is located. The proposed construction is an allowed use in R lA and in <br /> the Northgate Two PRD. <br /> 7. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such <br /> property or immediately adjoining pmperty. The fact that :�Torthgate Two is a PRD <br /> development makes this immediate neighborhood uaique within the R-lA district <br /> and these special PRD conditions are not generally fonnd within the R-lA district. <br /> 8. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the d�istrict in which <br /> the lan,d is Iocated. The conditions applicable to this property apply to all other <br /> bnilding pads within the �'orthgate T�vo PRD neighborhood, but the condition af <br /> having a Iat sized as a building pad with common open space e.stablished to create <br /> the normal setbacks is not common to the R-lA district in general. The lot <br /> coverage standards emposed by the City ordi.nance do not specifieally address the <br /> Northgate Two PRD situation. <br /> 9. The granting of the applicat�on is n�cessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a <br /> substantial property right of the applicant. Tlte property rights of the owner wiIl be <br /> diminished if the variance is denied, since expansion of the residence meeting al! <br /> establiahed Northgate Two PRD standards could not occur. <br />