Laserfiche WebLink
A.The City has approved lot width and area variances for this property in <br />1984 and 1986. <br />B. <br />C. <br />The size and width of the property is similar to other developed <br />properties in the surrounding neighborhood. <br />There is no adjacent undeveloped land available to increase lot area or <br />lot width. <br />D.A bluff has been located in the south yard. The proposed structure will <br />be located 36' from the top of the blutT where the Code requires a 30' <br />setback. <br />E.Excavations to create a walkout will encroach 3' into the bluff impact <br />zone. Ceil Strauss of the DNK in a letter dated April 12, 1996 advises <br />that the final elevations will actually slow down surface runolT providing <br />temporary ponding and reducing potential for erosion. In her letter, Ms. <br />Strauss approves the proposed grading plan. <br />The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar <br />to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that <br />granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor <br />pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely <br />serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a <br />demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial <br />property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and <br />intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br />The City Council has considered this application including the findings and <br />recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments <br />by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and <br />welfare of the community. <br />Page 2 of 5