PCAgenda_94Feb28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

p2~'23~9d 17:23 '612 337 5Bp1 DSrJ, INC. f~jpp4Jpp5 ilH~i~8r~11~1'~3110eS ~ ~ • ~ Although same any residents hags inked they do not object to the project end enc~oura~ property improvemerrts, there have laean objactians raised by same neibghbors over the encroachment into the rear y2~td, espeaatly since the yards are tight now, and the pxo~sed addition and garage are nth two stories felt. Conclusion The criteria for considering variance.sin §g-f5.Q3 Surd. 4 include consideration ©f the effect an property values and whether th®re is a hardship with the tat in question because it Is substantially different fmm other properties in the same zt~ning distrirt. In our opinion, the signiftcant encxoachm~nt on the near yard wauki h2tva a negati~-e effect on surroundiing properties, and we find that there are neighboring lots of similar size and shape which hetvrer not encroached on the rear yards. The rear yard variance request is dine to de+oisions by the owner and not to something inherent in the property, Also, the dppiicant needs ttt demonstrate that he cannot meet the orcnance standard without causing a hardship. It has riot been shown that expanding the house to the sfluth (where n4 variance would be needed) would cnaate a hardship. The rear yard variance, #herefore, is not justified. If expansion to the south is considered, therr3 is as rrnl~ch lot area available on the side as there is lot the proposed a~'itian #v the riser. In other words, there would be rrv penalty in squar~a footage for choosing to go south instead of west. The attached sketch, Available LotAnsa, shows that the proposed adc~n covers about 546 square feet of Ivt, wher+sas . the available lot area to the south within the setbacks is almost 6Q0 square fesrt. There is also adr#tional lot area widrin the setbacks to the nt~rth of the existing house -about 1513 share feet -that Gould be used as well. The ~pGcant says he has oonsider+ed thes® options, tx~t we ~ nvt convinced that a design professional has exhausted all the possibilities. In our experience, the difficulties cited by the appllc~nt can usually be overcome by en experienced designer. The side yard v2rriantx~ request far the garage is necessary to avoid a hardship, we beG®v®, because atwo-car garage of adequate width anti depth can be cvnsader8d a new in today's world. The 8ffect an the side yard is less than the effict an the existing house if the new garage ware to be located further south towark! the house. The side y~,~d vararrce, therefore, is justif'rac1. ATTACHNIERITS: A -Location Map B -Property Owner's Statement C -Site Plan D -Available t_ot Area