Laserfiche WebLink
. , ® : <br /> 1 is e <br /> I AT E : APPROVAL : <br /> June..12, 1987 <br /> T O : Planning Commission Members <br /> FROM : <br /> David M. Childs, City Manager <br /> ='IM EM : VARIANCE REQUEST FROM BILL CAMPBELL FOR CORNER OF 37TH AVENUE N.E. AND <br /> ROOSEVELT STREET N.E. <br /> This request from Bbill Campbell for a variance to construct a house on the existing <br /> lot of record located at the corner of 37th Avenue N.E. and Roosevelt Street N.E. <br /> As described in the notice, several variances are required: <br /> Lot size, 5,648 sq. ft. - 11,000 sq. ft. required for single family; <br /> 14,000 sq. ft. required for duplex <br /> Minimum house size, 988 sq. ft. - 1,000 sq. ft. required <br /> Setback from 37th., 14 ft. - 30 ft. are required. <br /> If the lot were not a "lot of record" , or if it were a full size lot with the owner wanting <br /> to build a larger house, no hardship could be shown. But in this case, as you will <br /> note from the excerpts -from the American Law of Zoning, we have a situation for which <br /> variances were originally intended. Strict enforcement of the setback requirements <br /> would allow a house- only- ten feet in width, which truly represents a hardship. The <br /> consequences of denying a property owner any use of his land also has strong legal <br /> implications with the whole issue of "taking". <br /> Appl-ication for a'- variance to build a double bungalow was made in 1979 by Andrew. <br /> Kocisczk and the City denied the variance. Since the owner still had an option to request <br /> a single -family dwelling; this denial probably did not represent a "taking" by the City <br /> but was surely in a grey area and the owner might possibly have been successful in <br /> court in gaining approval to build had he pursued the matter. The Planning Commission <br /> cited the fact that Mr. Kocisczk was not the original owner of the lot, and thus was not <br /> eligible for a variance. This argument will not work. The lot of record agreement <br /> goes with the property not the owner. If Mr. Kocisczk owned the adjacent lot, he would <br /> not be entitled to a variance, but this was not the case in this situation. <br /> I recommend approval of the variance with the provision that the driveway come from <br /> Roosevelt so that adequate parking is available to keep the cars off the right-of-way. <br /> One area where the applicant should be questioned is whether a 24 foot wide house: <br /> (with a 16 foot setback from 37th) -might work just as well as a 26 foot house. <br /> :c j k6 . 16.87 <br />