Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#17-3890 <br /> 17 Jan 17 <br /> Page 4 of 4 <br /> Practical Difficulties Analysis <br /> Staff finds that there may indeed be practical difficulties supporting the location of the entrance <br /> monuments. However, entrance monuments are an amenity and not a necessity. There is <br /> adequate space between the driveway and the road for some type of entrance monument to have <br /> been constructed to meet the 10 foot setback. <br /> Engineer Comments <br /> See comments from Adam Edwards, City Engineer, attached as Exhibit F. <br /> Public Comments <br /> The received public comments are attached as Exhibit I. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the <br /> essential character of the neighborhood? <br /> 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the <br /> impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? <br /> 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> Planning Staff Recommendation <br /> Should the Planning Commission find practical difficulties exist to permit the entrance <br /> monuments to remain at 4 feet and 3.5 feet as constructed, additional findings in support should <br /> be provided. <br /> List of Exhibits <br /> Exhibit A. Application <br /> Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form <br /> Exhibit C. As-Built Survey <br /> Exhibit D. Building Permit Survey <br /> Exhibit E. Swimming Pool Permit Survey <br /> Exhibit F. City Engineer Comments <br /> Exhibit G. Aerial Photos <br /> Exhibit H. Site Photos <br /> Exhibit I. Public Comments <br /> Exhibit J. Code Section <br /> Exhibit K. Property Owners List <br /> Exhibit L. Plat Map <br />