09-20-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FXIIIBITJi L This standard is not met by this application The plight of this landowner, proposing to redc\ e1op a very nonconforming traditional lot with a modem home by greatly increasing the height and bulk, **loo much house”, is of their own making and design. This "plight", created by the application of the LR-1 A district requirements to the development and redevelopment on Westl^e, was and is shared by all other landowners on Westlake All other landowners on Westlake have successfully resolved this by acquiring additional lots prior to proposing redevelopment Redevelopment of individual lots has been delayed until this could be accomplished This is the history of development and the record of City approvals and denials of similar applications on Westlake. Absem the requested variances the landowner may be economically inconvenienced and be inconvenienced by delay of their desired schedule, but even if this rises to the standard of "undue hardship", it is not a unique hardship It is an inconvenience and an economic cost, shared by, and enforced by the City on. all other landowners redeveloping property on Westlake There are no unique conditions or unique expectations that support consideration of granting this variance. The required severity findings are (I) The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls (10) The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant This standard is not met by this application. This is not a 1920 ’s cottage that is falling apart It is a livable home, similar to others waiting redevelopment on Westlake. It has the reasonable use of continuing to be reasonably occupied as a home, though perhaps not by the applicant's family, until the patient and careful process of lot consolidation can occur At that lime a variance consistent with the history of development along Westlake can be provided The applicant does not have the substantial right to unreasonably redevelop this property The restriction is not severe, has been and shared by all properties on Westlake, and has been successfully resolved in many instances In the context of Westlake, this docs not meet the standard of a severe restriction on the long-term use and enjoyment of the property. The second basic question is “Will the result of granting the variance be compatible with the use and enjoyment of the surrounding properties and their normal and orderly development’’ The required compatibility findings arc (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality (II) The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapte: This standard is not met by this application. The pattern of development of Westlake, while not in lull conformance with the LR-1 A. is not that of the LR-IC district, which is the result of granting the requested variance. It will permit unreasonable development of the lot with no