Laserfiche WebLink
FILE #LA22-000055 <br />21 Nov 2022 <br />Page 5 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />nonconforming home location, the Applicant has not identified special conditions to the <br />structure or land justifying the variance. <br /> <br />9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is <br />located. The Applicant has not identified conditions. This criteria is not met. <br /> <br />10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial <br />property right of the applicant. Substantial property right is provided by the existing principal <br />structure which may be rebuilt. The home is allowed to be maintained and replaced in kind. <br />Expansion of an existing non-conforming building or structure is not a right. <br /> <br />11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, <br />or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested variances <br />will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals; the Commission should determine <br />whether the expansions negate the goals of the code in relation to views into, and out of the <br />property, and hardcover limitations. <br /> <br />12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is <br />necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The variances provide an increase of home square <br />footage, improved aesthetic, and outdoor living space near the OHWL which could be <br />considered conveniences. <br /> <br />The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any <br />conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact <br />created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter <br />in the district where such land is located. <br /> <br />Public Comments <br />The applicant has provided acknowledgement forms from the neighbors on either side of the subject <br />property. However, no public comments have been received. <br /> <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property <br />in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br />2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential <br />character of the neighborhood? <br />3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts <br />created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? <br />4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> <br />Planning Staff Recommendation <br />The proposed project scope appears to approach a complete rebuild. The applicant is able to construct a <br />home or additions to the existing home in a more conforming location. It is possible to recapture some of <br />the existing home footprint area in the 75-foot setback for new outdoor living space. Having found no <br />substantial practical difficulties supporting the applicant’s request, Planning Staff recommends denial of <br />the application as proposed. <br /> <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A. Application