My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
VN-161
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Planning
>
Variance Files PLZ 02400
>
VN 101-200
>
VN-161
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2007 4:58:29 PM
Creation date
2/23/2007 11:42:15 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Page' 3 <br />VN-161-Minutes <br />Partyka noted that this. addresses the unique circumstances, <br />but questioned the prssen~ce of an undue hardship. <br />Brown stated that they need the storage space for their <br />business. <br />partyka questioned whether it was possible to acquire addi- <br />tional property. <br />Brown stated that may be an .undue hardship. <br />Bohling stated that he felt the building value would decrease <br />if only built to the limits allowed. He noted that each variance <br />case must be treated fairly. <br />Partyka stated that he doesn't feel they are violating the <br />intent of .the ordinance. tremendously. Partyka stated that he <br />did not feel the .3 figure was inflexible. <br />Wickland noted that the floor-area-ratio applies to everyone. <br />Brown..stated that that is why we have. variances. <br />Wickland stated-that there are:some eases where the conditions <br />for a variance can. be met, but that in-this case thos.econditions <br />do not exist. <br />Vots on Motion-2 ayes - 5 Hayes (Brown, .Bohling, Anderson, ; <br />Partyka,`Fredrickson)....Motion fails. <br />' Bohling questioned whether it was.pos ible to"find sufficient <br />warrants for unique circumstances anc7 applying to property to <br />off-set the:.absence of an undue hardshipo <br />Brown stated that he felt"it would be an undue hardship to <br />require'Spotts to pruchase additonal°property. - <br />Motion. by Brown, seconded by Fredrickson,"to recommend <br />.approval of VN-lbl because of the unique circumstances of the <br />property as,mentioned earlier and because of the unduehardshp <br />being that additional unusable land would have to be acquired:- <br />just to meet. ordinance requirements. <br />Wickland stated that he felt-this was providing Spotts <br />International with a special privilege. He said he intendeato <br />vote no. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.