09-17-2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Setback Variance Report 2434 Hillview Road September 17, 2003 Page 3 f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. Granting the four-foot variance to allow the roof extension to encroach six feet into the front setback would not be materially detrimental to the purpose and intent of the zoning code. There have been no objections raised up to this point and the six-foot encroachment would be imperceptible from the street and would not appear inconsistent with the adjoining homes. 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 proposed variance would not result in any of the above-cited adverse effects. Summary: All of the criteria, as indicated above, need to be satisfied to justify the granting the variance. Staff would take the position that the hardship criteria can be justified and that the resulting improvement would be a benefit to the subject property as well as to the neighborhood. While past practice should not justify future requests, the Commission did approve a similar front yard roof encroachment variance for Habitat for Humanity in 1997 for the property located at 5377 Quincy Street. In that case, the Planning Commission approved a six-foot roof extension to cover the entryway of the home. Recommendation: After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the property owner and affected neighbors, the Commission can take one of the following actions related to the request: 1. Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 738-03 is attached for the Commission’s approval if that is the chosen course of action. 2. Deny the requested variance. To move forward with this option, the Commission should direct staff to draft a resolution of denial with findings of fact appropriate to support the denial. 3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or if more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table the request until such information has been provided. Because of 60-day requirements, the Commission would need to act upon the request as soon as reasonably possible however to avoid an inadvertent approval. _____________________________________ James Ericson Community Development Director