4830 GLENWOOD AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER (John Robinett �i21-84) Based upon the written request for a variance from the City's zaning code, sepcifically 18.44.210, made by John Robinett, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant," the Board of Adjustment, following a public hearing on eaid , application held on August 6, 1984, and further having reviewed all testimony, i makes the following Findings, Conclusions and Order: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumetancea or ' conditions applying to the subject property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity or zone. a. Finding: The applicant owna a parcel of p;operty vhich is located ut 4830 Glenvood Avenue. The applicant's proper[y conalsts of a 147' X 300' lo[ with a single family residence. The property alopes to the weat and Glenwood Creek is on the western 1/3 of this eite. To develop a City atreet to serve 4 lots, the applicant needs 160 feet of frontage. b. Concluaion: The applicant's property does not have an adequate frontage for him to develop a public street system (i.e. lot configuratian, existing structure location and alope). 2. The authorization of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or in�urious to the property in the same vicinity or zone. a. Finding: The applicant is propoaing one access point onto Glenwood Avenue in which all lots would share a common drive. The common drive would have less impervious surface and would not require malntenance by the Ci[y. The common drive will reduce the potential access conflict points on Glenwood to one. b. Conclusion: Reducing con£lict point on an arterial is in the public welfare. 3. There are no reasonable alternatives which would allow for acceptable design of the short subdivision in accordance with existing atandards. a. Finding: Existing City standards would require a 40' R.O.W., 24' pavement width and a standard cul-de-sac. Zoning requirea 60 feet of frontage per lot, which results in the necd for 160 feet. b. Conclusion: Because of the limited area that is buildable on this site, putting in a City standard street would not be reasonable at this location.