CCP 04-24-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning Ordinance Findings: I. The proposed garage meets all required setbacks of the R-2 Zone. With the proposed garage, the building coverage would increase from 8.5 to 11.8 percent of the lot and the total landscaped area would decrease from 80.9 to 77.1 percent, both of which meet the requirements ofthe R-2 Zone. 2. The proposed 1,224 square feet garage exceeds the maximum 728 square feet for a single accessory structure in the R-2 Zonc, which is the purpose of the variance request. With conditions, the accessory stmcture meets all other requirements of Section 6.A ofthe Zoning Ordinance. Variance Findings: 3. The circumstances are unique to the property. The narrowing of the lot toward Grant Road would make it difficult to place and access an additional garage at the rear portion of the lot with an automobile. It is also difficult to meet all required accessory structure setbacks without a different variance if the garage were attached to the existing dwelling due to the location of the dwelling and the shape of the lot. 4. Granting this variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. For the lot as a whole, the proposed accessory structure size (1,224 square feet) does not exceed the total accessory stmcture square footage permitted for a lot in the R-2 Zone (1,456 square feet). 5. The applicant currently has reasonable use of the property with the existing dwelling and accessory stmeture without the proposed addition. However, the unique circumstances relating to the shape of the property limit its use compared to other properties of similar size in the R-2 Zone. While it would be possible to construct an additional accessory structure in the rear of the lot, it would be difficult to access the stmcture with an automobile due to the narrowing of the lot near the right-of-way and the existing stmctures blocking access to the rear of the lot. Nevertheless, it is possible to increase the size of the existing detached garage to 728 square feet from the current 484 square feet without a variance. Attaching a larger garage to the dwelling would likely require a variance to encroach on the front or side setbacks. 6. The hardship was not created by the owner. The lot lines follow the original plat, which was created before the current Zoning Ordinance was in place. Although thc existing dwelling, which encroaches on the front yard setback, is a legal non-conforming use, the location of the dwelling makes it difficult to attach a confonning garage of a reasonable size that meets all required setbacks. 7. Granting the variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Most lots in this neighborhood have an accessory stmcture that is visible from the street. While building two adjacent garages in the same location or two garages that are visible from the street that do not exceed the square foot limit may be possible, such an arrangement would likely be more out of character with the neighborhood than allowing a single structure. There are instances of garages on at least two properties being constructed in this neighborhood that are larger than 728 square feet; unfortunately, the City IIMctro-inel,lIs1ardenhiils\Plal1l1ing'IPlunning Cases120061,06-009 Morin variance (Pt:lVDING)I041706 - CC Reporr - Morin Variance.doc Page 2 of 4 . . .