02-09-2012 Planning Comm. Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 9, 2012 via a driveway over an unimproved portion of Rose Lane from Savage Lane. The Planner noted that the front yard is not adjacent to an improved public street, but given it is adjacent to street right -of -way, it is defined as the front yard under the Code. The Code allows outdoor storage as Anderson is requesting in the rear yard of a property fully screened from surrounding properties. Anderson is requesting a Variance to allow storage in the front yard. The Planner reviewed the new variance standards established by State Statute. These standards state that when considering variances, the City is required to find there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning regulations, and that due to unique conditions on the property, the applicant's alternative results in using the parcel in a reasonable manner. When the City finds these conditions exist, it may grant the variance. The City Planner reported that the applicant is suggesting that the following are all unique conditions that create practical difficulties: Existing Grade (steep slopes along the side yards which make storage of material on the driveway or in the rear yard impractical); Existing Tree Cover (proposed location in northeast corner of lot is situated such that existing trees and slopes screen the storage area better than if located in the rear of home); Configuration of Lot (front yard faces rear lot lines of property to north, while rear yard is more exposed to other adjacent parcels creating a situation where storage of material in rear yard, while meeting Code requirement, would be less visually attractive to most surrounding property owners). The Planner indicated that while the proposed storage location in the front yard is more convenient to the applicant's use, storage in the rear yard is not impossible. Under previous variance language of hardship and necessity, the application would have been required to show it was nearly impossible to use the property without a variance. The new variance standards are less restrictive, permitting the city to make judgments as to which alternative is more reasonable. The Planner stated that staff agrees that the Variance is justified as the combination of slopes, tree cover, and configuration of the property create conditions that are unique. The Planner reported that the applicant contacted him with comments relative to the planning report recommendations. In the first recommendation, the Planner noted that he is recommending no more than two cords of wood. The applicant informed him that he heats his home with wood and is asking for a maximum of 6 cords. The second - 5 -