header-left
File #: V17-033    Version: 1 Name: V17-033 - 3683 Ashwood Drive
Type: Variance Request Status: Passed
File created: 6/22/2017 In control: License and Variance Board
On agenda: 6/28/2017 Final action: 6/28/2017
Title: Public Hearing - Variance Request - V17-033 - Allow side setback reduction from 10 feet to 0 feet for the construction of a carport on a single family residence - 0.18 acres - Land Lot 554 - 3683 Ashwood Drive - Givenski and Deborah Rogers
Attachments: 1. Staff Memo - V17-033, 2. Application, 3. Notification
Impact

WARD:  6

COMMITTEE:  Community Development

$ IMPACT:  N/A

Title

Public Hearing - Variance Request - V17-033 - Allow side setback reduction from 10 feet to 0 feet for the construction of a carport on a single family residence - 0.18 acres - Land Lot 554 - 3683 Ashwood Drive - Givenski and Deborah Rogers

Body

ISSUE:  The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the side setback for 3683 Ashwood Drive from 10 ft. to 0 ft. for the construction of a carport on a single-family residence. The development standards established by the City for the R-15 zoning district require a minimum front yard setback of 10 ft.

BACKGROUND:  None.

RECOMMENDATION/REQUESTED ACTION:  The applicant is requesting to deviate from the development standards established by the City for the R-15 zoning district, which requires a minimum side yard setback of 10 ft.  The applicant is requesting a reduction of the side setback for 3683 Ashwood Drive to 0 ft. for a carport on an existing single family home. According to Section 1403 of the Zoning Ordinance, variances must be reviewed under the following standards: (1) Whether there are unique and special or extraordinary circumstances applying to the property; (2) Whether any alleged hardship is self-created by any person having an interest in the property; (3) Whether strict application of the relevant provisions of the code would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the property; and (4) Whether the variance proposed is the minimum variance needed. Community Development has reviewed the request against the variance review standards and found it to be in compliance with four (4) of the four (4) standards. Similar variances have been approved throughout the city so no negative precedent would be set.  At the time of this report, Community Development has not received any phone calls regarding the variance request. After a review of the standards above, Community Development believes that the encroachment will n...

Click here for full text