09-17-2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Setback Variance Report 2434 Hillview Road September 17, 2003 Page 2 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 property is zoned R-1 and the property owners would like to construct a roof extension to cover a recent deck addition on the front of their house. They are limited, however, in that their home and the homes adjacent to them were constructed at the minimum 30-foot setback. The lot is not irregularly shaped however it is substandard in size at 10,600 square feet. (The minimum sized lot in the City is 11,000 square feet.) A substandard lot size often presents limitations that a typical home-owner would not have deal with. 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. While the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, because of the set back and substandard lot size, expansion and reinvestment becomes more of challenge. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The special conditions do not result from the actions of the applicant. d. That granting the variance requested would 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. Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special privilege in that every property owner has the right to apply for a variance to improve the function and livability of their home. Many improvements benefit the neighborhood in a broad sense in that the reinvestment often triggers similar reinvestment in adjacent properties and at the minimum motivates property owners to take a greater sense of pride in property ownership. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The property owners assert that the six-foot roof extension (necessitating the four-foot variance) is the minimum variance to alleviate the hardship. Anything less than six feet would be impractical and would not cover the deck.