Laserfiche WebLink
that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; <br /> that the variance if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and that economic <br /> considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. (City Code §152.245(C)) <br /> 1. The request is not within the scope of Subsection 152.176 (F), Garage Setback Permit. The <br /> Code allows for a 528 SF garage to be in the side yard setback and/or the rear yard setback. <br /> Ms. Sanzone also needs a 308 SF variance to the Garage Setback Permit in order to build the <br /> size of garage that was originally there. <br /> 2. Strict enforcement would cause no practical difficulties because: <br /> a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a manner that is not otherwise <br /> permitted by the zoning code. If she wants to build a garage in the setback„the <br /> Ordinance requires it to be at maximum,528SF. She is also allowed to build a garage <br /> up to 1,000 SF as long as it is out of the rear yard and side yard setbacks. <br /> b. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not <br /> created by the property owner. While the construction of two garages was not done <br /> by the current owner, the previous owner was aware that the garage situation that he <br /> was creating was illegal. The City also did not amend the ordinance in any way that <br /> created this situation.The City Attorney confirmed that this situation with the <br /> garages is not a non-conforming situation,therefore does not meet the test of having <br /> circumstances unique to the property. <br /> C. The variance,if granted will alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The <br /> property owner has demonstrated that the siting of the proposed rebuilt garage will <br /> be in essentially the same location as the current structure. Nevertheless,building a <br /> garage that is proposed to be 836 SF in the setbacks does alter the essential character <br /> of the residential neighborhood. <br /> d. Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. <br /> 3. The variance, if granted, would not be consistent with the with the City's comprehensive land <br /> use plan. While the City does recognize that attached and detached garages are appropriate <br /> uses in the residential zoning districts, it has set limitation to size in order to keep and <br /> maintain the residential nature of an R-1 zoning designation. <br /> 4. The granting of the variance is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the <br /> zoning code. <br /> Attachments. <br /> • Site Plan from 2003 <br /> • 2011 Building Permit Application <br /> F:\Planning\StaffReports\2011\10182011 3219 Stinson Blvd garage permit stf rpt.doc10182011 3219 Stinson Blvd garage permit stf rpt.doc <br />