AgdaPkt 2003-06-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

9.A Redwood ity and such a decision must be considered very carefully. This topic is further discussed in this Analysis under the "Intention of the Zoning Ordinance" heading. Second Variance Test: No Special Privileae This discussion will consider two aspects related to this variance request and the granting of special privilege: t;le potential to build -out the property similarly to other properties in the area; and the existence of similar conditions on other properties. Build -Out Potential: The existing home could be expanded in three different directions, to the rear, to the front, or in a new second story. Build -out potential is briefly described for each scenario. • Rear— 936 square feet in a two -story addition behind the existing home. • Front — 1,856 square feet in a two -story addition in front of the existing home • Second Story— between 1,250 and 1,710 square feet in a second story over most of the existing first floor A combination of one, two, or all three of these design alternatives could result in a substantial addition and represents a build -out potential similar to other homes in the area on the same sized and even larger parcels and similar in floor area to the 1,300 square foot addition that is sought. It is acknowledged that an addition to the front might not result in an optimal floor plan for the proposed new bedroom, bathroom, master suite, and family room and staff is not suggesting this as a preferred alternative. However, a combination of an addition to the rear and to a new second -story, with a layout somewhat modified from the proposed plans, could result in a satisfactory layout and architectural design. In fact, the applicant has received architectural permit approval for an 1,061 square foot two -story addition that conforms to the current Zoning Ordinance. These conforming set of plans are current under building permit review with the Building & Inspections Division. Given the number of alternative design combinations that could be utilized, staff believes that the applicant could accommodate the amount of additional square footage desired (approximately 1,300 square feet) without impacting the kitchen addition that was permitted in 1995 (Appellant's issue D, Kitchen). Consequently, allowing a setback variance would constitute a special privilege in contrast to development standards imposed on other 6,500 square foot R -1 lots in the neighborhood and the City as a whole. Similar Conditions of Other Properties: Ordinance 1130.273, effective November 15, 1990 established a rear yard setback requirement of twenty (20) feet. Prior to ordinance adoption, the rear yard setback requirement for properties zoned R -1 was six (6) feet. Therefore, any construction prior to the adoption of the current ordinance would be considered legal non - conforming. Any construction proposed on a parcel zoned R -1 following the adoption of this ordinance would be subject to the twenty (20) foot rear yard requirement. The staff report associated with this amendment is on file with Planning Services. Homes that were built with setbacks less than twenty (20) feet prior to the ordinance amendment in 1990, are not considered to be precedent cases (Appellant's Issue E, Neighboring Preexisting Conditions). Homes that were built with rear yard setbacks less than twenty (20) feet with variances granted due to irregular parcel shape are also not precedent cases (Appellant's Issue F, Other Variances). Research back to 1997, did not