Laserfiche WebLink
i I <br /> Criterion No. 2• I <br /> That such variance is nec�ssary for the preservation and en- <br /> j,�yment of a substantial property right of th� appellant pos j <br />� i!sessed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity or <br /> 'zone. <br /> a. Findina: The Applicant contends that issuance of building , <br /> permits led him to believe that his plans were in <br /> conformance with zoning requirements thereby giving him <br /> the right to build as shown on the buildina �n_ans ae have <br /> others who have received building permits. <br /> b. Conclusion: Granting this variance will allow the � <br /> applicant a property riqht possessed by others who have ! <br /> obtained building permits. I <br /> Criterion No. 3: 'I <br /> ' That the authorization of such variance will not be materiallyl� <br /> , detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property in the , <br /> vicinity or aone in which the property is located. ' <br /> a. Findina: There are no views in the area that would be I� <br /> blocked by the two foot extension into the setback area. ' <br /> b. Conclusion: Granting this variance may not be , <br /> detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other I <br /> property in the vicinity or zone. � <br /> Criterion No. 4• <br /> ; <br /> 'Phat the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the � <br /> Comprehensive General Plan. ! <br /> a. Findina� The Comprehensive Plan designation for this <br /> property is Single Family Residential. � <br /> i <br /> b. Conclusion: The use will be single family residential , <br /> and so is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> RSCO}Q�E2IDATION: ' <br /> �,PPROVE the variance as requested by the applicant. <br /> Prepared uy`7'o.,�vr.2 �7� <br /> �� Reviewed by ��1�� ������� -- �� <br /> I � <br /> � � <br /> � <br /> I <br /> i <br /> � <br /> � <br /> �� <br /> ��I <br /> i <br /> I <br />