Laserfiche WebLink
<br />6. That the variance request is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the intended <br />purpose of the applicant. <br /> <br />7. That literal interpretation of the regulations for cul-de-sac length would deprive the applicant <br />of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district. <br /> <br />8. That the special conditions causing the undue hardship do not result from the actions of the <br />Applicant. <br /> <br />9. That if granted, the variance will grant special privilege that is denied to other owners of <br />lands, structures or buildings in the same district. <br /> <br />10. That, if granted, the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent <br />property . <br /> <br />11. That, if granted, the variance will not unreasonably diminish or impair established property <br />values with the neighborhood. <br /> <br />12. That, if granted, the variance will increase the danger of fire or endanger public safety. <br /> <br />13. That, if granted, the variance will have the effect of allowing a use prohibited in the <br />applicable zoning district <br /> <br />14. That, if granted, the variance will permit a lesser degree of public health, safety and general <br />welfare protection than established by City Code. <br /> <br />15. That, if granted, the variance will not permit standards which are lower than those required <br />by State law. <br /> <br />16. That, if granted, the variance will violate the intent of the Comprehensive Plan <br /> <br />The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Board Member <br />Cleveland, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt <br />Board Member Levine <br />Board Member Cleveland <br />Board Member Brauer <br />Board Member Hunt <br />Board Member Trites Rolle <br /> <br />and the following voted against the same: <br /> <br />None <br /> <br />Resolution #06-05-143 <br />Page 2 of3 <br />