CC PACKET 11122013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

November 4, 2013 Page 3 b. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the property owner; 'file existing garage is currently five feet from the side property line. "Therefore, there is no way the proposed staircase could be constructed on the north side of the property in a way to meet the code. Other options available to the property owners would be to construct the staircase inside the garage, which would result in the loss of at least one, if not both of the required enclosed parking spaces. Constructing the staircase on the west side of the garage would require significant modifications to the structure to allow for a door. Criteria met. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Allowing the proposed stairway is not perceived to have more of an impact on the essential character of the locality than if the stairway were constructed alongside the garage in a location that did meet the zoning code setback requirements. If the staircase was five feet off the side property line, it would not require a variance, but it would create the same visual impression on the neighborhood as it will in this instance. The stairway is narrow (4 -feet wide) and will not detract from the visual aesthetic of the neighborhood. The Applicant has expressed that the neighbor to the north is not opposed to the proposed staircase. Criteria met. d. L;conornic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical dtfficerlties. The basis for the practical difficulties is that the garage is already constructed five feet from the side lot line and does not allow for steps to be constructed in a way that would comply with the Zoning Code. The other options available would either result in a parking space being lost within the garage, which is a requirement of the Code, or require that significant modifications be done to the garage to accommodate for the second story door. While economic considerations are a factor, it is not perceived that they are the sole basis of the practical difficulty. Criteria met. 3. The variance, ifgranted, would be consistent with the city's comprehensive land use plan. If the variance is granted the use of the property would remain the same land use as it is today. The Applicant is not proposing (nor would they be allowed) to house their business out of the space; rather utilize it for a studio to provide work for his business with off-site sales. The comprehensive plan guides this area for single family use and adding the steps will not after that use. Criteria met. 4. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code. The intent of the zoning code is to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the city and its people through the establishment of minimum regulations governing land development and use. The zoning code is established to: a. Protect the use districts; The proposal would not change the use of the property or create a disruption to the Single -Family Residential District. The current use (and proposed use) as a single- farnily home is consistent with the City Code. Criteria met. b. Promote orderly development and redevelopment; The proposal seeks to make an improvement to the property by allowing the property owners to make use of the space above their garage. The proposed steps would not be detrimental to the neighboring property. Criteria met. c. Provide adequate light, air, and access to property; 43