Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />! <br />I <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />I <br /> <br /> PROPOSED <br /> FINDINGS OF FACT <br />FOR MR. DENNIS LEESEBERG <br /> <br />1) That the applicant has properly applied for a Board of Adjustment variance <br />as required by City Ordinance to construct a detached accessory building <br />larger than allowed by City Ordinance. <br /> <br />2) That on May 31, 1983, the applicant appeared before the Board of Adjust- <br />ment for a public hearing. Said public hearing was properly advertised and <br />the minutes of said public hearing are hereby incorporated by reference. <br /> <br />3) That the applicant's property is approximately one and one-half acres in <br />size and that it is Plat 89207, Parcel 2590. <br /> <br />4) That the applicant's request is to build an accessory building 24 feet <br />by 36 feet for a total of 864 square feet. <br /> <br />5) That City Ordinance would, on a parcel of property this size, allow an <br />attached garage of 864 square feet and a detached garage of 624 square feet <br />for a combined total of 1,488 square feet. <br /> <br />6) That the City Council, in the past, has denied requests for accessory <br />buildings that did not comply with the Ordinance in regards to size. <br /> <br />7) That there are several detached accessory building in the immediate <br />neighborhood that exceed 624 square feet in size. <br /> <br />8) That there are not exceptional, unique, or extraordinary circumstances <br />or conditions applying to the property in question as to the intended use <br />of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same <br />zoning district. <br /> <br />9) That such variance is necessary not for the preservation and enjoyment <br />of a substantial property right similar to that possessed by other properties <br />in the same district and in the same vicinity. <br /> <br />10) That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detri- <br />ment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the intent and pur- <br />pose of this Ordinance or the public interest. <br /> <br />11) That the condition or situation of the specific piece of property, or <br />the intended use of said property, for which this variance is sought, is not <br />of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the <br />formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situation. <br /> <br />12) That this variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, <br />produces substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest. <br /> <br />13) That properly constructed, the building would comply with the require- <br />ments of the State Building Code. <br /> <br /> <br />