08-16-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, FnCM LEONAED STREET AND DEINARD M&.J«iccJ.OBQd)ach ' Au|utl3.2004 Pi<03 IKON) 8.16*04 9:20/ST. 9:19A0.4261040584 P 4 Here, the mpieit is reasoiuble because the City's Code pemits Mr. MacDonald to have a garage. Tba variance requests also is in keeping with die spirit and intent of the setback requirancBt beewse (1) it is 1.6 loot vahance request, and (2) .Mr. MacDonald's rqiairs did not changa the location of the garage. The Planning Cooimtaaion muat also consider whether the variance, if granted, would alter the eascBiial dunetcr of the neigbboibood Again, garages are permitled under the City's Code, and the vviflKC. if grvted. would simply allow the garage to remaiB in the sane loctfioa. As such, it is my opoiion no ftctual suppOT exisa for a finding that a garage alters the essential character of the neighborhood. Significanlly, the City's Code provides that the City will look favorable on variance requests for non-oonfonnities that relate to the location or height of the structure. Ordinance 78-71(10) provides: "The nooconfofmiog use provisions of this chapter apply only to the use to which land and buildings are put. and do not annlv to where location or heieht of stnictuees. lot tixe or other factors not iovoWuig the use of the praniscs prevent strKl coaAiniiaDce with the requirementa of this chapter. Where, however, lucA a iituaiton llv under the prior law, fflglfll yij! unfea«nnahly require strict compliance and B*"fallv look with favor of araniine s variance under diviiion 3. luhdiviskm n of thia airicle." In thia case, the City agrees that the garage is a lewfol oon-eonlbniimg use, and the variance requeri. if one is required, relates to the locatioo of iba structure. Therefore, the City's Code provides that the Council will ool unreasonably require shict compliance and will generally look with favor of grantmg a variance such aa Mr. MacDonald's request As such, even if the City were to determine Mr. MacDonald needs a variance, a variance is justified. Mr. MacDonald mamtami that a variance is not lequired because MimicsoU law allows a property owner to repair or maintain a nep<onfbttmty. Ihe work done by Mr. MacDonald did not changa the setback of the atructura, and tfacrelere, it is my opinion Mr. MacDonald docs not need a variance. However, if the City dclemiincs Mr. MacDon ald does need a variance, the facta demoostraie such a variance is wamoaed. i iibilM