My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-25-1992 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
11-25-1992 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/8/2013 2:35:49 PM
Creation date
8/8/2013 2:34:40 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Variance Request. A variance from the terms of this Ordinance <br />shall not be granted unless it can be demonstrated that: <br />a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar <br />to the land, structure, or building involved. <br />(1) Special conditions may include exceptional topographic or <br />water conditions or, in the case of an existing lot or <br />parcel of record, narrowness, shallowness, insufficient <br />area or shape of the property. <br />(2) Special conditions and circumstances may not be primarily <br />economic in nature. <br />b. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance <br />should deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by <br />other properties in the same district under the terms of this <br />Ordinance. <br />c. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from <br />the actions of the applicant. <br />d. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the <br />applicant any special privilege that is denied by this <br />Ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same <br />district. <br />e. A genuine hardship exists in complying with the literal terms <br />of this Ordinance. <br />Application for a variance shall set forth reasons that the <br />variance is justified in order to make reasonable use of the land, <br />structure or building, and that the variance is the minimum <br />variance. <br />Variance Analysis. The parcel has been previously subdivided <br />through development actions initiated by the City, thus making the <br />lot non - conforming in size. A substandard lot width has existed on <br />this lot since the R -1 standards required 75 foot widths. The <br />small size of the lot may justify granting this variance. <br />The layout of the proposed house does not hinder traffic visibility <br />at the corner of Rosewood Drive and in this regard provides a good <br />footprint layout on the lot. <br />Our office is only concerned that 16 feet from Rosewood Drive on <br />the west side of the lot may not be a sufficient buffer to noise <br />and traffic safety concerns. In order to increase this setback, it <br />is suggested that the house be positioned five feet to the east, <br />resulting in a 21 foot roadway setback and a five foot side yard <br />setback. A five foot side yard setback is not uncommon in that <br />2 <br />Page 24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.