CCP 03-29-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- ~- e Weare seeking a variance from the required 40' front set back to allow replacement of the front stoop and steps (which measures 6'by 7') with a new stoop/steps of the same dimensions and in the same location. The house itself has a front set back of32,7' with the stoop/step projecting out 6' towards the street The proposed garage will have a front setback of 38'; it is my understanding that the variance applied to the stoop/step could also apply to this smaller variance. 2. Whether a granted variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the City's Zoning Code. This is our first home (purchased in 1997) and we did not anticipate the specific zoning issues regarding nonconforming buildings. A survey of the homes on our block reveals that those homeowners have or would also need to seek forward/rear setback variances since those homes are also nonconforming buildings (see photographs). We have considered several construction plans in an effort to comply with the code while dealing with the inherent constraints of our site. The variances we request are consistent with other homes in our area and do not change the general layout of our lot or the aesthetic feel of our home in relation to our neighbors. We believe the variances we seek are consistent with the spirit and intent of the code. 3. Whether the property in question can be put to a reasonable use without the granting of a variance. As described above, the existing structure at 1863 Lake Lane is a non-confonning structure due to the lay of the lot and its shallow depth. Complying with the 30' rear set back requirement not only makes compliance with the 40' front set back extremely difficult it would also place any new construction out of place with the existing main residence. This situation constitutes a hardship under wlrich the proposed improvements cannot be done if the code is strictly applied. The requested front setback variance is necessary because of the lot layout. The current front stoop and steps are in disrepair and need replacement; the placement of our home on the lot creates a need for a variance to allow us to do so. We have considered building a detached garage at length because we don't need a rear set back variance to do this, but we have been unable to overcome the disadvantages of this strategy. An obvious disadvantage of a detached garage is the loss of the convenience of an attached garage, which is one of the aspects of our home we really appreciate. Secondly, whether we detach or attach the garage, we would still build in the same location in relation to the rear property line (I0.2 feet) so, from a practical standpoint, to detach the garage changes nothing in relation to the property lines. If we build a detached garage, we would have to move our driveway further westward, wlrich is problematic for a maple tree in our yard we would like to preserve. We have found that our options for planning our garage is limited as a result of the unusual lay of our property.