1977-03-22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

cause undue hardship. . The statute provides that property owners may request variances where strict enforcement of the provisions would cause undue hardship "because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. The trial court held that the evidence justified a determination that if the variances were not granted, defendant would suffer undue hardship because of unique circumstances not reflective of conditions general to the neighborhood. The neighborhood is composed of older homes, generally maintained in adequate to excellent repair and superior to the condition of the structures on defendant's tract. The setback requirement was unique to the tract, as compared to the usual setback requirements in tracts in "C" Residence Districts." [It must be noted. that although this setback requirement may have been "unique to a "C" Residence District," at the time the request for the variance was made the property was zoned "B Residence District. Furthermore, the setback- requirement for a Multiple Unit Residential District, "C", are either a minimum of 25 feet or a maximum of 50 feet depending upon the number of stories.]" 210 NW at 419, 420 and 421. In summary, the Minnesota Supreme Court in Merriam Park said that "unique" circumstances do not require that the property be different from all other properties i.e., having no like or equal. The Court said that if "this line of reasoning is followed, the granting of any variance, no matter how minimal, will be practically impossible, except where the topographic conditions of a specified parcel would render the tract of land in question otherwise of value." Furthermore, the Court noted that undue hardship could be based upon the economic feasibility of the proposed construction. 8