9 P & Z Administrator's Report - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9. The applicant has established that there are practical difficulties in complying , with the code. The existing asphalt does not allow sufficient parlang area to display numerous luxury boats for sale. Gravel display areas are not conducive to the overall appearance or the cleanliness required for the proposed use. �o.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. � ii. The deviation from the Code will still be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City Code and Comprehensive Plan. The applicant will be required to retain additional stormwater runoff generated by the increased impervious surface coverage onsite. , 12. The variance will not create a land use not permitted in the Commercial zone. �I The proposed commercial use of the property is allowed with a conditional use � permit(Conditional Use Permit #i9-�o). � 13.The subject property is surrounded by Commercial development to the north and � west. The subject property is bounded on the east and south by State Highway � 37�. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality of the ; subject property. I i4.The variance has not been made based on economic considerations. ' On the request to construct a flag pole exceeding the maximum building height: ' i5. The applicant proposes to place an 8o-foot flag pole in the southeast corner of subject property. The maximum height for structures in the Commercial Zone is 25 feet. i6.The applicant intends to fly a 30'X 40'American flag on the proposed flag pole. i�. The applicant has not established there are practical difficulties in complying with the maximum height ordinance. A flag pole meeting the requirements of the ordinance may be constructed in multiple locations on the subject property which would be visible to patrons of the proposed commercial business and the adjacent public right-of-way. i8.The property owner does not propose to use the property in a reasonable manner. , An 8o ft high flag pole is not reasonable given it is over three times the maximum height allowed in the Commercial Zone. ig.The"plight of the landowner" (not being able to construct an 8o ft tall flag pole under current ordinance) is not due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner.The subject property is relatively level.The height and location of existing structures on the subject property and adjacent properties do not create a visibility issue for a 25'high flag pole. The subject property does not have any unique circumstances or features which would justify an 8o ft tall flag pole. 2o.The deviation from the Ordinance with any attached conditions will not be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 2i. Flag poles are an allowed use in the Commercial Zone.The variance will not create a land use that is not allowed. 22.The variance request would alter the essential character of the locality. The exceedingly tall flag pole (and flag)would be visible from great distances. No other commercial or residential properties in the city have flag poles remotely close in height to the proposed flag pole.