Community Development Department Variance Length of Dock Roof 2 Cardinal Court.

Community DevelopmentDepartme

nt

Variance Variance Length of Dock RoofLength of Dock Roof

2 Cardinal Court2 Cardinal Court


nt

Variances• Definition – Relief from measurable standards

of Code due to physical constraints (shape, topography) that would otherwise create a hardship if applied or enforced.

• Purpose – Protects against unfair treatment of individual while preserving community standards.

• Administration – Burden of proof upon applicant; standardized questions promulgated because of litigation.

• Results – Approval runs with land as long as structure remains.

Aerial Map


nt


nt

FLU Map and Official Zoning Map


nt

Site Photos – North


nt

Site Photos – Northwest


nt

Site Photos - Northeast


nt

Site Photos - East


nt

Site Photos - West


nt

Site Plan


nt

Dock Plan


nt

LDC Section Variance is Sought

Roof Lengths for Saltwater Canal Docks

Property canal frontage: 70 to 79.9 ft. Maximum Roof Length: 30 ft. Requested Roof Length: 33 ft. Variance: 3 feet – 31 foot

long roof plusoverhang


nt

Variance CriteriaULDC Chapter 2 Part II Section 2.05.05A. In conflict with the public interest?

Application of criteria does not create hardship; dock possible;

B. Development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan?

Yes, dock is accessory use to single family. C. Significant financial liability or hardship for the City?

No changes required to Comprehensive Plan CIE or CIP.D. Creating a hazard, nuisance or threat?

No, smaller adjacent lots with more canal frontage can have bigger docks;

E. Compliance with other criteria?Yes, the proposed dock appears to meet other criteria.


nt

Variance Criteria, continuedULDC Chapter 2, Section 2.12.03 1. Special conditions and circumstances peculiar to the land, use, or

building and not applicable to others in the same district-No, LDC limits roof lengths based on canal frontage to maintain proportion of house to dock and maintain navigation.

2. Special conditions and circumstances are not self imposed- No, applicant desires a larger roof than permissible. 3. Application of the land development code standards to the property

creates an unnecessary hardship & depravation of rights – No, dock still possible.4. Variance is the minimum relief necessary- No, relief includes reduction in size of dock.5. Granting the variance is in harmony with the public health, safety,

welfare and is not detrimental to the area- Yes, because: -Dock roof potentially smaller than others in

immediate area; -House is situated on canal, maintaining proportion of buildings; -City owns property south of and adjacent to lot, restricting development.


nt

Recommendation

• Denial, based upon failure to comply with LDC Chapter 2, Section 2.12.03 – Review Findings A.1 and 2.

Community Development Department Variance Length of Dock Roof 2 Cardinal Court.

Documents

Transcript of Community Development Department Variance Length of Dock Roof 2 Cardinal Court.