11/14/91 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. That the Applicant is proposing to construct an accessory structure measuring I2' x 24'. That the Applicant cannot enlarge the existing attached garage on the property towards the front yard (west) without encroaching on the required setback from a thoroughfare. That septic, drainfield and well locations prohibit the Applicant from constructing the accessory garage in the north yard,and-4~a That the south yard has been diminished by the subsequent construction of 177th Avenue N.W. to a point where it cannot accommodate an accessory structure in addition to the 35 foot comer side yard setback. That the Applicant is proposing to place the accessory structure south and east of the existing principal structure at a point which measures approximately 12 feet from the comer side property line. That there are unique circumstances applying to the subject property that do not generally apply to other properties in the district; namely that the subsequent alignment and construction of 177th Avenue N.W. resulted in the subject property becoming a comer lot with ~eater development restrictions. That the unique circumstance on the subject property does not result from the actions of the Applicant. That the Applicant has stated that such a variance is necessaD, for the preservation of a substantial property right similar to that possessed by other properties in the R-1 Rural Residential District. That similar variances have been granted in the R-I Rural Residential District. That if ~anted, the variance wil w~l n0~)substantiallv increase the con_,aestion of public streets, mr increase the danger of flre-~ or~ndanger the p~ublic safety, or sul~stantially impair property values within the neighborhood. That if granted, the variance wil~_Mll not, violate the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. That if ganted, the variance willffw2~-h~gant the Applicant any special privileze that is denied to other'owners of lands, srr~e-m~s or buildings in the sarr~e district. ~ That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: