header-left
File #: V17-056    Version: 1 Name: V17-056 - 2139/2141 Valley Oaks Dr
Type: Variance Request Status: Passed
File created: 12/11/2017 In control: License and Variance Board
On agenda: 12/13/2017 Final action: 12/13/2017
Title: Public Hearing - Variance Request - V17-056 - Allow duplex on one lot be converted to two fee simple lots - 0.294 acres - Land Lot 420 - 2139 and 2141 Valley Oaks Drive - Qui Guibin
Attachments: 1. VarmemoV17-056.pdf, 2. Valley Oaks Variance Application.pdf, 3. Valley Oaks Recordable Plat.pdf, 4. October 2, 2000 Council Meeting.pdf
Impact
WARD: 5

COMMITTEE: Community Development

$ IMPACT: N/A

Title
Public Hearing - Variance Request - V17-056 - Allow duplex on one lot be converted to two fee simple lots - 0.294 acres - Land Lot 420 - 2139 and 2141 Valley Oaks Drive - Qui Guibin

Body
ISSUE: The applicant is requesting a variance to convert a single story duplex on one lot into two fee simple lots so the units may be sold to two separate buyers. In order for the deeds to be recorded the applicant will need to record a plat with a property line dividing the two units. A similar variance for 2136/2138 Valley Oaks Dr was approved for a variance in 2000. The subject parcel is located on the east side of Valley Oaks Dr (see Figure 1). The subject parcel is zoned RD (Residential Duplex), and contains the original 3,000 sq. ft. single story duplex. The applicant proposes to sell each unit to two independent buyers with the fire wall acting as the property divider. The adjacent properties to the north, south, and west are zoned RD and are occupied by duplex residences. The properties to the east are zoned R-15 and are occupied by single family residences.


BACKGROUND: None.

RECOMMENDATION/REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a duplex to be converted into two fee simple lots. 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 the four (4) standards and believes that the reduction will no...

Click here for full text