08-07-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 AUGUST 07, 1996 • PAGE TWO OF SIX Background: This request was discussed at the July 24, 1996 Planning Commission Meeting. The property is located at 3025 County Road H. The request is for a variance to encroach five feet into the required thirty-five foot front yard setback, a conditional use permit to construct a church in an R-1 Residential Zoning District, and a development review for the new construction. In addition, the applicant will be required to obtain a wetland alteration permit in order to construct a structure within the 100-foot wetland buffer area. This wetland alteration permit requires a public hearing that may be held concurrently with the review of the other applications. A Wetland Zoning District Map (attached) shows the east side of the property to be located within the 100 • - foot wetland buffer area. The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,002 square foot, single- story church on an R-1 Single Family Residential property. The Municipal Code requires a conditional use permit in order to construct a church on an R-1 Single Family Residentially zoned property, and a wetland alteration permit for construction within the • 100-foot wetland buffer area. The plans show the church to be encroaching five feet into the required thirty five foot front yard setback. The applicant has presented a hardship statement that the five foot encroachment will provide better access for emergency vehicles and will provide additional landscaping for neighbors to the north. As the Planning Commission is well aware, there are specific criteria to be met for granting a variance. One of the criteria is that the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Staff feels that the encroachment is caused, in part, by the size of the proposed building in comparison to the size of the property. There appears to be insufficient room to accommodate both the parking and the landscaping with the size of the building and still meet setbacks. The size of the building is a result of actions by the applicant, and does not meet the criterion. The provision of additional landscaping on the north side of the property does not overcome the problem of crowding on the site. Additional landscaping for neighbors does not appear to meet this criterion. Thus, Staff would recommend that a variance not be granted in this case, based on the applicant not meeting the criteria for granting variances. The minimum thirty foot side yard setbacks are met with this •