header-left
File #: V19-012    Version: 1 Name: 2730 Fraser St - V19-012
Type: Variance Request Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 2/22/2019 In control: License and Variance Board
On agenda: 2/27/2019 Final action: 2/27/2019
Title: Public Hearing - Variance Request - V19-012 - Allow reduction of front setback from 35 feet to 20 feet - Land Lot 449 - 0.24 acres - 2730 Fraser Street - New Oak Homes LLC
Impact
WARD: 3

COMMITTEE: Community Development

$ IMPACT: N/A

Title
Public Hearing - Variance Request - V19-012 - Allow reduction of front setback from 35 feet to 20 feet - Land Lot 449 - 0.24 acres - 2730 Fraser Street - New Oak Homes LLC


Body
ISSUE: The applicant is requesting two variances, allowing encroachment into the City’s 50 ft. undisturbed buffer and front setback reduction to 20 ft. The subject property is non-conforming, as it contains an older structure that sits 20 ft. from the front property line, and within the 50 ft. Undisturbed Buffer. The applicant plans to either build a new home or remodel the existing home. Stream buffers are controlled by Chapter 6, Article VI. Setbacks are controlled by section 801 of the zoning ordinance. The applicant plans to either remodel the existing home with a new addition to the rear, or to demolish the existing home and retain the existing 20 ft. front setback and stream buffer encroachment. The applicant has provided site plans for both options (See Figures 5 & 6). The applicant plans to install flow wells in the rear yard to provide channel protection and peak flow reduction, regardless of which option is selected. This variance is associated with V19-011.




BACKGROUND: None.

RECOMMENDATION/REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting relief from the city’s 50 ft. undisturbed buffer and 35 ft. front setback to remodel the existing home, or build a new 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 ...

Click here for full text