Laserfiche WebLink
8382 Knollwood Drive Variance Appeal Report <br />June 8, 2015 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br /> <br />a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these regulations. <br /> <br />The zoning code limits driveway openings for traffic safety reasons, and for neighborhood <br />aesthetics. Staff feels that limiting the applicant to a 24 foot wide curb cut would not be depriving <br />him of something commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district. <br /> <br />b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />The Comprehensive Plan does not address this specific of an issue, but traffic safety and <br />management is an important function for the City. By limiting the curb cut width, less vehicles <br />can be parked next each other near the street which improves visibility when exiting out of a <br />driveway and the streets are safer. Keeping driveway openings smaller, and consistent in size <br />betters the aesthetics of the neighborhood. <br /> <br />c. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this <br />Title or the City Code. <br /> <br />The driveway is the same width as the 3-car garage. The applicant is requesting to keep the curb <br />cut 34 feet wide for easier access to all three garage stalls. <br /> <br />d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in the <br />same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over <br />which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title has had no control. The unique <br />circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. <br /> <br />There are no unique circumstances that apply to this property. The applicant did not build this <br />house or install the driveway. He purchased the house with the existing driveway in 1989. <br /> <br />e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. <br /> <br />The applicant’s neighborhood consists of larger sized lots. The driveway would remain as it has <br />since 1977 and would not change the character of the neighborhood. <br /> <br />f. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical <br />difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties. <br /> <br />The 10-foot variance is the minimum variance needed in order for the driveway apron to remain <br />the same width as the rest of the driveway. <br /> <br />g. The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited by a <br />variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title or to reduce <br />or minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood, and to better <br />carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must be directly related to and must bear a <br />rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. <br /> <br />Staff has no suggestions for conditions for the variance request. The Planning Commission may <br />add conditions as they see applicable. <br />