03-04-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Case No. 513-98 8265 Spring Lake Road • February 18, 1998 Page 2 c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners or other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may impose such restrictions and conditions upon the premises benefited by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title or to reduce or minimize • the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood and to better carry out the intent of the variance. Background: • In 1996, the Economic Development Authority(EDA) acquired the proposed lot through the Housing Replacement Program(HRP). The existing building was then razed and the lot cleared. The property is located on a corner having dimensions of 80'x 218'. According to City Code, a 100' frontage is required for a corner lot in the R-1 Zoning District. In September of 1996, at the time the lot was owned by the EDA,the Planning Commission granted a 20 foot variance to the 100 foot lot width requirement for a corner lot to recognize the existing 80 foot lot width. On January 30, 1998, the EDA sold the proposed lot to Preferred Builders, Inc. As part of the purchase agreement, Preferred Builders is required to build a minimum of a 3 bedroom 2 bath home with a two car garage. The home the applicant is proposing meets all site criteria as outlined in the purchase agreement with the EDA. However, the home is 7 feet wider than the maximum building width allowed by City Code for the proposed lot. Hardship: The applicant indicates that a hardship exists because a standard corner lot would be at least 100 feet in width and would accommodate the proposed home. The proposed home is 52 feet wide with a three car garage. The applicant claims that the current market demands homes with a three car garage. Because the lot is only 80 feet in width and located on a corner with 30 foot • setbacks along each public road, the proposed home would need to encroach approximately 7 feet into the building setback of the road right-of-way along Ardan Avenue.