05-27-1998 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Variance The applicant has requested a variance which would permit the construction of porches on the west side of the building for each unit. However, the porch for the southern -most unit would encroach into the 30 foot rear setback. The applicant is requesting consideration of a variance from the rear -yard setback, based largely in consideration of the fact that the property to the west is setback substantially more than the requirement, thus leaving a significant spacing between buildings. At issue with the variance, however, is whether the proposal meets the criteria for variance consideration. The criteria listed in the Ordinance revolve around hardship created by the regulations, and whether the property can be put to a reasonable use without the variance. In this case, we do not believe that the regulations restrict the reasonable use of the property. Clearly, all four units of the development can be accommodated without the variance. It is only a portion of the porch which encroaches into the setback. In addition, it-would appear the there is buildable area to the side of the structure (south) which could accommodate a porch. It is acknowledged that this may necessitate some internal redesign. Moreover, the City recently denied a similar request in an R -1 District. Although the zoning district was different, the rationale would appear to be the same as that case - a restriction on enclosed porches does not unreasonably restrict the reasonable use of the property, and there would appear to be design alternatives to the one requiring the variance. Preliminary/Final Plat The application for a townhome plat includes the engineering data necessary to determine the ability of the City to provide services, and density /lot sizes for the project. As noted above, the project parcel consists of 0.85 acres, just over 37,000 square feet. This is over 9,000 square feet per unit, well in excess of the average density requirements of townhome developments. The Public Works director has provided comment on the utilities issues. We would recommend approval of the plat, subject to the utility and drainage comments of the Public Works department and the City Engineer. The Parks Commission should comment on the park dedication requirements for this project. Processing In the R -2 District, townhome projects such as this one require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, in addition to the Plat and Rezoning approvals. Although this application was not noticed as a part of this project application, the CUP would appear to be appropriate, subject to the submission of a landscape plan which identifies common area landscaping and typical "foundation" plantings around the individual units. With the exposure of the project toward the freeway interchange, we would recommend heavy front yard buffering of the project. Page 8