Agenda - Council - 04/26/2016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

A2016-8 Staff Report April 5, 2016 Page 3 of 12 Variances may be eranted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are Practical difficulties in comnlvine with the zonine ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Findings for a practical difficulty are: 1. That the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this ordinance. The applicant is proposing to develop a vacant property in the City, and is attempting to develop the site in a reasonable manner. The applicant has taken into account the unique setting of the property in terms of its proximity to the Mississippi River. The applicant has also worked with the City of Anoka to preserve space within the site for environmentally sensitive areas, such as bluffs and riverfront areas. The proposed use is also reasonable because both of the proposed uses of the property are permitted in planned unit development districts. The only aspect of the proposed development that is not permitted by the zoning ordinance is the size. However, the smaller size is necessitated by the reasons listed above and still puts the property to use in a reasonable manner. 2. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The staff report has suggested that decreasing the size of the planned unit development district is a reasonable request, therefore this analysis should determine if the shape of the lot or other unique physical circumstances creates the need for a variance. The site is surrounded on the south and east by a bluff, which is an area where the slope of a natural topographic feature rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level and averages a 30% grade or greater. Past the bluff lies the Mississippi River and other land that is currently owned by the City of Anoka an used as public open space. The site is constrained by these natural topographic and environmental features, which are unique to the property and were not created by the landowner. The size of the proposed planned development could have been expanded to meet the 5 acres, but any expansion would have included areas that are not developable. The proposed size of 3.8 acres also preserves more of these environmentally sensitive areas under public ownership. Staff believes these physical circumstances are unique to the lot and were not created by the land owner, which results in the need for a variance. 3. The proposed variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The property is located in an area with a variety of surrounding zoning districts and land uses. The property is constrained by unique physical circumstances that create the need for a variance to allow for a smaller planned unit development district. The smaller size of the planned unit development district will not alter the essential character of the locality. The subject site is vacant, but was previously developed as a mobile home park