10-06-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Johnson Variance Application 2075 &2081 Hillview Road October 6, 1999 Page 2 Analysis: As was pointed out at the September 15th meeting, there are a number of hardships pertaining to these properties which makes the approval of a variance seem appropriate. The first is the lots topography. There is a section of level land immediately behind the four-plexes which then begins to slope downward toward the rear of the property. Location of the garages further back on the lot would require substantial filling and land alterations. The second hardship stems from the fact that these lots were not developed with garages in mind--the buildings were located in the center of the lot. While this positioning maximizes the distance between the buildings, it also limits the space available for construction of garage stalls. The last identified hardship is again based on the topography. Because of the rear slope of the properties, the garages would need to be closer to the buildings to take advantage of the available level land. If the proposed garage structures were to maintain the required five-foot setback, the end garage stalls on either side would be difficult if not impossible to access. Variance Criteria: With these hardships in mind, staff examined the criteria which the Planning Commission is to consider in any variance request. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The individual criteria, with responses, are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property 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 topography of these lots severely restricts where garage structures can be located without substantial and overly burdensome elevation reparations. b. T ie-literal-interpretation ofthe-provisions ofthis-Title-would-deprivelhe appli-cantof rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. Because of the topography and the distance between the buildings, the applicant is already limited to providing only three garage stalls for each of the buildings, instead of one stall per unit. If no variance were granted, only two garage stalls could be provided for each building. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant is not in control of the lots' topography nor was the applicant in control of where the four-plexes were located upon the lots.