CCP 01-08-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

application for a, front yard setback variance at 1867 Glen Paul Avenue, staff made the following A findings: ,., 1. Whether the circumstances for which the variance is requested are unique to the property, The properties along Glen Paul Avenue are, generally, between thirty-five and forty feet from the front yard setback (Exhibit D), The current code requires that the houses be placed forty feet from the front property line, There are no plans to amend the language of the ordinance nor does the comprehensive plan forecast any future changes to this area. This location of the home, terrain or shape of the property is no different than its neighboring properties, Therefore, this request does not possess any unique circumstances. 2, Whether granting the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the City's Zoning Code, The intent ofthe zoning ordinance is to ",. .fix reasonable standards to which building, structures and land shall conform for the benefit of all", The zoning ordinance also states that a variance should only be granted if the configuration of the property prohibits reasonable development that may be perniitted on a similar sized lot within the same district. This lot is no different from other lots in the district. There is no physical feature of this property that is prohibiting development so that it needs to occur within the setbacks. Any reasonable development that could be constructed on any lot in the district could also be duplicated on this lot according to the standards 'that have been set. Therefore, granting a variance for this application would not meet the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance. ], Whether the property in question can be put to a reasonable use without granting of a variance, e A single family home is currently constructed on the property. Therefore, the property in question has already been put to a reasonable use. The applicant is proposing to add on to the front of his home because of the interior layout and location of the kitchen, However, it is possible to reconfigure the addition in some manner to avoid requiring a variance from the ordinance, It can not be said that without this variance, the property could not be put to a reasonable use. 4, Whether the hardship was created by the property owner, Although the shape of the lot and position of the house are not the fault of the current owner, the owner is proposing the addition within the setback area, creating the need for a variance, This could be avoided by reconfiguring the addition so that it was not within the required setback area, The need for this variance is being created by the property owner. 5, Whether granting the variance will alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The current structure is situated at 35,5 feet from the front yard line, Therefore, to expand the home by foUr feet to match this setback will not significantly alter the character of the neighborhood, However, it should be noted that the structure is currently nonconforming by building placement and, by ordinance, nonconfonning structures should not be expanded, Ifthis is not the intent of the City, then the ordinance should be amended. e 2