My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
VN-166
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Planning
>
Variance Files PLZ 02400
>
VN 101-200
>
VN-166
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2007 4:48:22 PM
Creation date
2/23/2007 3:02:01 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
PvELC ti~ilRTitiTCG <br />vN-166 <br />_ December 28, ,1976 (8:'05. P..~i. <br />Rectuest: VN-166, Variance to permit subdivision-of property. <br />with -lots having less thin the required minimum width. <br />Applicant: Eugene F. Skba <br />Locations 8th Street-NW west of Ilth Avenue. <br />Zon inq R.. l <br />_Code Requirements: <br />Section 10-010 .states .that the minimum requirements for lot <br />dimensions in ;single fam y residence district are: <br />1. 75 feet wide at established .building setback Tine. <br />-Sections 2-700 and'~11-040 state that the crucial points of <br />a variance .request are: <br />1. Undue hardship <br />2.' Unique circumstances,-and <br />3. Applying to property. <br />It is further stated that a variance is not justified unless <br />all three elements are present in the case< <br />Discussion: <br />The applicant is requesting a variance in conjunction with <br />his application for preliminary plat approval to subdivide a <br />presently unplatted parcel into four lots with each -lot having <br />74.5 feet in width. <br />The applicant has noted in his application: that the parcel <br />only has access off of 8th Street and that because of the sizable <br />assessments, development into at 1Fast 4 lots is required. <br />The.Zoning Code and platting regulations show an intent to <br />create lots of certain shapes and sizes. The question in this ' <br />case is whether the request violates the intent of these ordinances. <br />The. lots would be uniform in shape and size, are six inches short <br />of 75 feet in width, are considerably over the LO-,000 square foot <br />minimum area and should not cause any problem for access, development <br />or drainage. In these regards, the overall intent of the Zoning <br />Code andplatting regulations would not appear~to be violated <br />by this request. The Zoning Code does not, however, .make provision <br />for one excess factor (ioe., greater lot area) to compensate for <br />a deficiency (i.e., inadequate lot width}e Therefore, the factors <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.