1998 Planning Commission Packets

Home Browse Search

White Variance Planning Case No, 533 -98 September 2, 1998 Page 2 Analysis: At the last Planning Commission meeting, significant discussion was held regarding the merits of this case as well as the interpretation of the language in the Code regarding setbacks. Because of many factors, such as the slope of the land north of the garage, safety considerations and lack of access elsewhere on the lot, the Planning Commission acted to table the request to enable staff to draft both approval and denial versions of the resolution. a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the properties which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. The factors which could be construed as extraordinary relating to this request include the slope of the land laying between the garage and the adjoining property and the fact that the shed is located outside of the enclosed pool area, which takes up a majority of the backyard. The shed faces north, toward the adjoining property. Access to the shed then is gained most conveniently from alongside the north side of the garage. Because of the slope, the sidewalk had to be supported by footings to be level. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. If the variance request was denied, the applicant would either need to remove the sidewalk completely from alongside the shed, which would be a hardship given a sidewalk has existed in this location for more than twenty years, or cut the sidewalk back a foot. In so doing, a gap would be left between the sidewalk and the chain -link fence which is on the applicant's property. It was felt that this gap would pose a considerable safety risk due to the height of the fence and slope of the land. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The slope of the land in this aea is the primary basis for the variance request, a condition over which the applicant has no control. d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district.