PL PACKET 12172018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

December 17, 2018 Page 2 CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE PROPOSED VARIANCE 1. Background The applicant has submitted an application for a lot split to two single‐family lots. The proposed lot split would require a variance from the lot size for corner lots in the R‐1 Single Family District. The lot size minimum is 11,000 sqf for corner lots in the district. The applicant proposes an 899 sqf variance to allow a 10,101 sqf corner lot. The question is whether there is evidence of a practical difficulty in meeting the minimum lot size. The criteria for approval of a variance is provided below. 2. Applicable Codes. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code: 152.039 Dimensional Regulations (B) Area and width. The minimum lot size for a corner lot is 11,000 sqf. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Section 152.245 VARIANCE (A) Application states that “An owner of property with an existing structure which does not comply with the zoning code, or of property on which such a structure is proposed to be constructed, may apply for a variance upon payment of the fee specified in Chapter 33”. 3. Criteria for and Consistency with Criteria for Variance Approval. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Section 152.245 Variance, (C) Evidence, lists the criteria the City Council must consider in determining whether to grant or deny a variance. Request: Variance for a reduction to the minimum lot size for a corner lot in the R‐1 Single Family District. The applicable criteria include: 1. The subject matter of the application is within the scope of this section. The application for a variance to the lot size requirement is an eligible subject matter for variance criteria because it is related to dimensional and/or bulk standards. Criterion met. 2. Strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because: a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code; The applicant proposes to create a lot that is smaller than that allowed by the zoning code. Criterion not met. b. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the property owner; The lot split request is created by the property owner and is not an existing condition. Criterion not met. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; Granting this variance would conflict with the zoning standards set for the neighborhood and locality. Criterion not met. d. Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. There is no evidence that economic considerations alone are not the basis of the request. Criterion not met. 3. The variance, if granted, would be consistent with the City’s comprehensive land use plan. The City’s comprehensive plan does not suggest a lot size reduction in the R‐1 Single Family District. Criterion not met.