CCP 11-18-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to Planning Commission Planning Case #02-31 Page 4 of6 2. Would granting the variance be in keeping with the spirit and intent ofthe City's Zoning Ordinance? . Yes. Currently the Zoning Ordinance allows principal structures to be set back as close as five feet from interior side yards. Ifthe garage were attached to the building it could be constructed five feet from the interior side property line. The interior side setback requirement appears to be a mistake in the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore it appears that granting the variance would be consistent with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Could the property in question be put to a reasonable use without the granting of the variance? No. If the variance were not granted the applicant would have to either: build the proposed garage at the required side yard interior setback often feet, relocate a portion ofthe driveway to the east to accommodate the new location ofthe garage, and experience difficulties accessing the eastern half of the garage; or the applicant could build a garage at the far northwestern corner of the property thereby decreasing the angle necessary to access either side of the garagc. Constructing a garage at the northwest corner of the lot would require the applicant to travel 45 feet from rear of her home to enter the garage versus traveling 15 feet from the rear of the applicant's home to the proposed location. A garage in this location would also result in a larger portion ofthe yard being . covered by the driveway and thereby reducing the usable size of the applicant's rear yard. While the distance would serve as a large inconvenience to the applicant, the property could still be put to a reasonable use in that it could contain the house and garage while meeting the current setback requirements. That noted; staff recognizes that the applicant is merely attempting to replace a garage which was destroyed by fire. Locating the replacement garage at five feet to the east or in the northwest corner of the lot would require removal of a portion of the driveway and pouring of some additional driveway to accommodate either new location. Even after these changes are made and the new garage location has met the setback requirements; the applicant would suffer either difficulty in accessing the garage due to the sharp angle, or inconvenience in having to travel 45 feet from the garage to the house. In this light, the alternate locations due not seem reasonable for development of a garage on this lot. 4. Was the hardship created by the owner? No. The garage that was demolished due to fire damage was constructed by a previous owner conditional approval based on consent of the neighboring property owner to build closer to the lot line. Building Permit #2036 shows that the original garage built in 1950 was approved on condition that the neighboring property owner had to approve the reduced setback of 3 feet from the side yard interior property line. The applicant is requesting the variance to place the garage .