Resolution - #93-06-126 - 06/24/1993

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9. Tha[~eonl!.truction of the garage addition in a manner that meets the thoroughfare setback wi~t~,q ~t~;removallf~. of mature tree growth and adversely impacts the architectural lines of the p c pa], st cture. 10. That ~he subject property is entitled to a total of 1,488 square feet of garage and accessory buildl~n, g ~pace; that the total area of the existing garage and the proposed addition is 872 squar~ fe~t. 11. That ~e~ are unique circumstances applying to the subject property that do not generally appl~to ~ther properties in the district; namely, that the principal structure was developed on t§~ p~perty prior to the establishment of the thoroughfare setback requirements. 12. Thai ~e ~ecial conditions causing the undue hardship do not result from the actions of the Appian,. as the home was platted and constructed on the property by persons Other than the A~pliCant prior to the establishment of thoroughfare setback requirements. 13. That ~e variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. 14. That ~ch,:vadance is necessary for the Preservation'of a substantial property right similar to that i~sse~sed by other properties in the R-1 Rural Residential District, namely achieving a reas0r~abl& amount of the allowable garage space established by City code for a parcel this size. 15. That if~ grated, the variance will not grant the Appliciint any special privilege that is denied to other o~,ners of lands, structures or buildings in the same district. 16. That i~ granted, the variance will not be materially detrimental to the purPoses of the RamSay Zoning Chapter or other property in the R-1 Rural Residential District. 17. That,i~; gra~ted, the variance will not substantially increase the congestion of public streets, or inc.t, ea~ the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially impair properly vralues within the neighborhood. . . 18. That tl~e applied for use is not an expansion of the need for public services on the property. The motion f0~r th~ adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Board Member Deemer and lal~on ~tote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Chai~g~ Terry Hendriksen Board Member Bawden Board Medaber Deemer Board Me~ber LaDue . Board Member Paul Holland Board ~lember Bradley Thorud and the folloW~g voted against the same: None ~ and the following abstained: None . and the folloWthg Were absent: