AgdaPkt 2003-06-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

q.A -g Ordinance regulations. In this particular case, the planner on duty consulted the Zoning Administrator while the applicant's architect waited at the counter. From the earliest encounter, staff advised the architect that this did not appearto be a reasonable variance request. Throughout the review process, staff also provided the appellant with multiple opportunities to withdraw the application with a full refund, however, the appellant sought to proceed without a poroitive staff recommendation. Planning staff makes every attempt to provide consistent advice and clear code information and interpretation. Staff meets weekly with the Zoning Administratorto discuss these types of applications and Zoning Ordinance interpretations to make sure all staff members are "on the same page." The Zoning Administrator is also available to consult with staff throughout the day and at the counter when needed. Homeowner's Association Review: Homeowner's Association review is an important step in the design development process for properties in Homeowner's Associations. The review is very helpful to Planning staff in that the Homeowner's Association is very familiar and comfortable with the architectural context of their area. The proposed plans were reviewed and approved by the Homeowner's Association. However, Homeowner's Association review and approval does not indicate zoning conformance. It is not uncommon for Homeowner's Associations to approve designs based on their architectural merit that do not conform to the Zoning Ordinance standards. This is not the Homeowner's Association purview and staff works with applicants to resolve conflicts with City codes and ordinances. Previous Variances: The Zoning Administrator has consistently applied the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance to all projects brought before her. Where the physical conditions of the property prevent projects from complying with the Zoning Ordinance specific findings have been prepared identifying the unique circumstance(s) that cause hardship to the property to justify the authorization of a variance; thereby, ensuring that a consistent administrative record has been established. Furthermore, as previously stated, neither the previous, nor the current Zoning Administrator has granted any variances for flat parcels of standard shape and size that back up to open space according to research back to 1997 (Appellant's Issue F, Other Variances). The appellant's letter made specific mention of a variance granted for 615 Teredo Drive in 1998, citing similarities between the appellant's variance request and the findings of this previous variance. In short, the findings of the variance for 615 Teredo Drive stated the property is irregular in shape (58' frontage, 86.16' rear lot line, and 100' depth) resulting in a 20 foot rear yard setback for the south side of the residence and a 15 foot rear yard setback for the north side of the residence. The findings also made reference to the location of the Mariner Park, the existence of mature trees, and the previous development pattern with reduced setbacks. (Reference Attachment 3). Staff has considered the findings of this previous variance with respect to the appellant's request and is still of the opinion that the appellant's variance request cannot meet the required findings as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Furthermore, staff and the current Zoning Administrator have had the opportunity to visit 615 Teredo Drive to reference the implementation of the aforementioned variance. As a result, staff position not to support the variance request has been reaffirmed. Despite the proximity of nearby mature trees and irregular lot shape, the bulk and mass of this two -story addition with a fifteen (15) foot