05-14-2025 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner permitted by this ordinance. The property owner is seeking to ensure that mature trees remain in place which is both permitted and encouraged by City ordinances. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The properties were developed under a previous version of the City’s zoning code, one that would have permitted this boundary line adjustment without a lot depth setback variance as there was no standard for lot depth at the time of construction. Though changes in standards alone are not typically considered enough to be a unique circumstance, the cumulative impact of the standard change and the physical placement of the homes, built to the former standard, creates a practical difficulty not self- imposed by the current owner. The owner’s plight fundamentally stems from a technicality created by a change in City standards though it continues to comply with the larger intent of the ordinance to ensure lots are of an appropriate size and provide adequate spacing from one another. c. The variance will maintain the essential character of the locality The entire purpose of the variance is to maintain mature trees, a core attribute of the character of the neighborhood. Staff believe practical difficulties exist and that the applicant meets all required criterion for a lot depth variance. There is no other remedy for the homeowner to guarantee the maintenance of the character- defining trees that separate the two properties other than to formally shift the property lines. The properties were developed legally under the city’s code not even 25 years ago, and the property owner is not responsible for the City’s ordinance being changed. RECOMMENDATION City Staff is supportive of the minor subdivision and believes that the applicant meets the required criteria for a variance. Staff finds that the applicant has demonstrated practical difficulties and meets all required criteria for both variance requests. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the minor subdivision for 49 Old County Road C and 50 County Road C East, the rear setback variance, and the lot depth variance for 49 Old County Road C, based on the findings of fact outlined in this report.