Laserfiche WebLink
Pursuant to the Pequot Lakes City Ordinance, Section 470.040 17-11.7, the applicant should be <br /> prepared at the public hearing to explain the practical difficulty in comglyingwith the ordinance for Deleted:unique hardship <br /> the proposed variance. <br /> af the landowner is due to eireumstaneeg uni�e to his property nat ereated by the landawrier,art <br /> the—v*riaf ee, if granted, wi4 net alter the essential eharaeter of the leeality. E <br /> the terms of the Ordiftanee. Practical Difficulties is described as: The pro pery ownerproposes to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control;the plight of the landowner i due to circumstances Deleted:d <br /> unique to the properly not created by the landowner;and the variance, iQranted, will not alter the essential character <br /> of locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical diffculties include but are <br /> not limited to,inadequate access to direct sunkght for solar energy systems. <br /> (1) What are the practical difficulties, or unique circumstances of the parcel size, shape, <br /> topography or other characteristics that make strict interpretation of the Ordinance <br /> impractical? <br /> (2) Are the conditions upon which the petition for a variation based unique to the parcel of land.,..-- Deleted:Does the property owner <br /> for which the variance is sought?If so,were the conditions created by the landowner? propose to use the <br /> Formatted:Indent:Left: 0", <br /> (3) If the variance is granted,will it alter the essential character of the locality? Explain. Hanging: 0.5" <br /> Deleted: property in a reasonable <br /> manner not pernutted .by the Ordinance? <br /> (4) Is the variance request in harmony with the general purposed and intent of the Ordinance? Explain. <br /> Formatted:Indent:Left: 0", <br /> (5) Does the need for a variance involve more than economic considerations? Explain. Hanging: 0.5" <br /> (�) Is the variance request consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? Deleted:3 <br /> What other options, either conforming or non-conforming, have been considered and why <br /> were those options not chosen? <br /> (1) What are the un� ees of the pareel size, shape, topography or ethe <br /> (3) Haw wiH reasonable ttge of the pareel be deprived if the va±ianee is riot granted? <br /> 3 REV-MAR-24W <br /> JUNE,2013 <br />