09-22-1986 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

8. Revision of the roof line of the existing house to create a usable second story above the existing house would result in additional encroachment on neighbor's sunlight due to gher peak, and might also require a ariance to maximum height rt .,t-rictions, and second story structure over garage is less of an encroachment on sunlight or open space. 9. Expansion to create additional space outside the existing walls of the house is limited by the hardship of the small lot size. The lot was created and existing house constructed prior to formal City zoning controls. These conditions are unique to the property and do not generally apply to other developed lots in the LR-lB Zoning District. 96% of the developed lots in the LR-lB Zoning District exceed 0.20 res in area. The subject lot contains 0.199 acres in area. These que conditions were not created by the applicant. No additional __..d is available for acquisition by the applicant to make the property more conforming. 10. The second story addi.:ion will not alter the essential character of the neighb _hood b, will be consistent with existing development in the ieighI.o: >od. The amount of sunlight, air, and open space in the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. The traffic conditions in the neighborhood will not be adversely affected but actually may be improved. 11. Because one of the general purposes of sideyard setback and height requirements in the Zoning Cede is to maximize `he am-int of open space, air, and s ight in a neighborhood, it is apE.ropriate to restr' ct the height of :is garage addition, given ' he side setback varia,t%,e allowed. 12. The City Council has considered this arplication including the findings and recommendations of the Planning CommiE reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and comments by public, and the effect of the proposed variance on .he health, sat y and welfare of the community. 13. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affFjt '.traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or o dang;r to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a cone . ;ne to the applicant, but is neces-arY to alleviate a deoi--astrible 'Nardsh.p o.- difficulty; is necc .ar- to preserve a subl;t2 Ulf F. arty righ'.: of the applicant; an3 w, be in keeping with th,, spit. and intFnt of the Zoning Code aid C rehensive Plan of he City. Page 3 of 6