09-27-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT J3 No variance has been granted for redevelopment on a 50 ft wide lot on Westlake. Variances for lot width and lot area have been granted when a 50 ft lot has been vacated and consolidated prior to or as part of the redevelopment. The approval of this application would be an exception to the City ’s action in previous similar applications on Westlake, 3. The Reasonable Expectations for New Development at 340, 348 and 356 Westlake The only remaining 50 ft wide two thirds of an acre lots on Westlake reflecting the original platting are at 340, 348 and 356. All other lots have been expanded by consolidation prior to or in anticipation cf redevelopment. Each of these 50 ft wide lots is occupied by a home that is livable, and could be remodeled, if desired. The decision of the Commission to deny tl is application will reinforce, encourage and reward the stow, patient and expensive invest»ncnts made by homeowners redeveloping this block in a way that approaches the requirements of the zoning code. It wilt reinforce the larger tots and adequate side yards that arc emerging as the character of Westlake consistent with the LR-1A District. Granting the variance will reverse this pattern. It will immediately end the opportunity to combine 356 with any adjacent lot. And, the precedent you will have established will end any incentive to do the hard, expensive and patient work of as.sembling 340 and 348 and 356 prior to redevelopment. The development of these three lots individually and at 50 ft in width and with 10 ft side yards, which will surely follow approval of this application, will introduce a very different character to Westlake. A change in character we oppose. The required findings on whether the property in question can be put to a reasonable use, the plight of the landowner, its circumstances unique to this property at 356, the effect of the variance, if granted, in altering the essential character of the locality, the finding special conditions apply to the stracturc or land in question that arc peculiar to suen property or iir mediately adjoining property, the conditions not applying generally to othei iand or staictures in the district in which the land is located, and the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, should be made in the context of the all three of the remaining traditional lots on Westlake. The impact of any decision will extend beyond this newly acquired property of the Fitzpatricks. Approval of the requested variances eftcctivcly represents a rc/.oning of 356, and by the extremely attractive precedent it creates, 340 and 348. to the LK-IC district and a windfall to those individual owners. Wc oppose this fundamental change in the rules and pi opc:ty rights that have applied to all other redeveloped and anticipated to be redeveloped properties on vVesilake 4. The Reasonable Redevelopment of 356 Westlake A Effective south side yard is not increased but is reduced Technically, the minimum south side yard is 8 2 ft. This occurs along 6 6 ft of the south side of the home, and is in the form of an elevated planter area and a very small greenhouse that continues the slant of the mansard roof, see photos one and two. The remaining 39 ft of this 45 ft long home, the wall of the house, presently provides an approximately 12 ft setback from the south property line. It is true that while 13% of the setback area will be increased by the proposed plan, 87% of the present setback on this side will be reduced, not improved. And, the .1