Loading...
6.2. SR 01-21-2003MEMORANDUM Item #6.2. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Leeseberg, Planner DATE: December 16, 2002 SUBJECT: Case No.V 02-08 Request by Louis & Pat Pertl for a Front Yard Setback Variance Request The applicant requests that a variance be granted to allow construction of a detached garage within one of the 35-foot Front Yard Setbacks on a comer lot. The proposed encroachment would only be into one setback (the "side" yard) for 10-feet (from 35-feet to 25-feet). Attachments · Location Map · Site Plan (Option B) · Aerial Photo Location 19796 Lowell Street NW (comer of Lowell Street & 198th Avenue) Lot-7, Block-7 Brentwood Addition Zoning/Land Use Rla, Single Family Residential / LR, Low Density Residential Existing Conditions The property is located in Brentwood Addition which is zoned Rla with a minimum lot size of 2 ~ acres. However, the subdivision was platted in 1980, prior to the Rla zoning and this property is only 1.3 acres in size. Memo to City Council December 16, 2002 Page 2 About two thirds of the property is heavily wooded and approximately one-third of the eastern side is cleared which contains the existing home, well, septic field and retaining walls. The property is a comer lot, which has two front property lines. Because of heavy vegetation, the house and the proposed location of the garage would not be visible from any neighboring homes. The terrain of the property slopes down from the house to the west. There is a considerable amount of grade change (approximately 6-8 feet) from the house to where a garage could be built without a variance. Overview At the December 16, 2002 City Council Meeting, the Council reviewed the facts regarding the request for this variance. After a motion to deny the variance died for lack of a second, the Council requested that it be tabled to determine if the amount of encroachment into the setbacks could be reduced. The applicant has provided a plan (Option B) that reflects both what he feels will suit his needs as well as what the Council indicated they would like. The garage would only require one variance, which would be to the side of the house on the 198tn Avenue side. This encroachment would be only 10-feet versus the original request of 1?-feet. There would no longer be a requirement for a front yard variance on the Lowell Street side. The new proposal has greatly reduced the amount of variance than was originally requested. There was discussion about placing the garage directly behind the well, but this approach would limit the function of the garage and a variance would still be needed in this location. If placed in this location, the well would be directly adjacent to the driveway servicing the garage and also near the garage entrance kself. There would be the constant threat of striking the well with a vehicle. Staff believes this is not a suitable location as k would place the well and personal vehicles in a daily chance of property damage. Analysis In order to grant a variance from the literal interpretation of the ordinance, the following five conditions must be met: 1. L iteral mfomonmt of the ontinancewill cause undue haMship. Literal enforcement would require the applicant to place the garage in a location that will not suit the applicant's physical needs and would not be accessible or place it where there is constant conflict with the well. It will also require the removal of a significant amount of trees to place the structure in an area that would not require a variance. The hardship is caused by spetSd conditions and cimanamm~, ~ are peculiar to the ~ a~l the structure braxl~ ard zxhid~ are not characteristic of, or applicable to, other lands or structure in the S:kPLANNING\Case Files\2002\V 02-08 Pertl\V02-08 CC-2.DOC Memo to City Council December 16, 2002 Page 3 The hardship is caused by spedal conditions and drcumstances that are peculiar to the land. The lot size is much smaller than the minimal lot size for the zoning district. The site is heavily wooded and the house was placed close to the road to minimize the impact of tree removal. The contour of the terrain limits the applicant's mobility. The location of the well restricts where the garage could be placed. The property is a corner lot, which has two front property lines, which further restricts the "side" of the house. Other properties in the same district do not have the same characteristics (lot size, terrain, vegetation) that limit the land that is available to construct additional garage space. Other properties have detached garages in addition to an attached garage. 4. The ~ ~ and cima97amm~ are not a conmqumce of the petitioner's ovaa action or ~. The special conditions are not a consequence of the applicant's actions or inactions. The spedal conditions relate to the physical characteristics of the site and the location of the house, well and septic field. The house was purchased in its existing condition by the applicant. The granting of this variance would not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the city or the neighborhood where the property is located. The removal of oak trees may in fact produce oak wilt in the area if not done properly. Recommendation Staff believes that the applicant's proposal (Option B) will meet their wishes and more importantly, their physical needs. The new proposal also has fulfilled the Council's request in redudng the amount of setback variance. Staff recommends that the City Council grant the variance request, as proposed by the applicant's new proposal (Option B), of the front yard setback from 35-feet to 25-feet on the 198th Avenue side. The recommendation is based on the following findings: LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PLACE THE GARAGE IN A LOCATION THAT WILL NOT SUIT THE APPLICANT'S PHYSICAL NEEDS AND WOULD NOT BE ACCESSIBLE OR PLACE IT WHERE THERE IS CONSTANT CONFLICT WITH THE WELL. IT WILL ALSO REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TREES TO PLACE THE STRUCTURE IN AN AREA THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A VARIANCE. S:XPLANNING\Case Files\2002\V 02-08 Perd\V02-08 CC-2.DOC Memo to City Council December 16, 2002 Page 4 THE HARDSHIP IS CAUSED BY SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE LAND. THE LOT SIZE IS MUCH SMALLER THAN THE MINIMAL LOT SIZE FOR THAT ZONED AREA. THE SITE IS HEAVILY WOODED AND THE HOUSE WAS PLACED CLOSE TO THE ROAD TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF TREE REMOVAL. THE CONTOUR OF THE TERRAIN LIMITS THE APPLICANT'S MOBILITY. THE LOCATION OF THE WELL RESTRICTS WHERE THE GARAGE COULD BE PLACED. THE PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOT, WHICH HAS TWO FRONT PROPERTY LINES, WHICH FURTHER RESTRICTS THE "SIDE" OF THE HOUSE. OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME DISTRICT DO NOT HAVE THE SAME CHARACTERISTICS (LOT SIZE, TERRAIN, VEGETATION) THAT LIMIT THE LAND THAT IS AVAILABLE TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL GARAGE SPACE. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS ARE NOT A CONSEQUENCE OF THE APPLICANT'S ACTIONS OR INACTIONS. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS RELATE TO THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE AND THE LOCATION OF THE HOUSE, WELL AND SEPTIC FIELD. THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE INJURIOUS TO OR ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REMOVAL OF OAK TREES MAY IN FACT PRODUCE OAK WILD IN THE AREA IF NOT DONE PROPERLY. S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2002\V 02-08 Pertl\V02-08 CC-2.DOC Location Map Case Number: V 02-08 PAT & LOU PERTL N II