Laserfiche WebLink
. .. �LCr � I '�`` <br /> subject property that conformed to the zoning code in effect when the <br /> improvement was constructed. <br /> a, Findinas: The subject property has a steep upward incline <br /> from England Ave. makmg access to the top of the site <br /> difficult. The applicant is proposing a 6' to 8' rockery along the <br /> front property line in order to backfill and provide a driveway <br /> approach almost parallel with England Ave. <br /> b. Conclusions: Access to the site is difficult due to the steep <br /> topography of the subject property. <br /> ['riterion No. 2• <br /> That the variance will not be materially detrimental to the property in the <br /> area of the subject property or to the City as a whole. <br /> a, Findin¢s: The applicant has stated that the variance will <br /> allow the subject property to develop in a manner similar to the <br /> properties on each side of the subject property. <br /> b Carlson and submitted at he hearingeconcerning,vie blocRkage <br /> of their property. <br /> Criterion No. 3• <br /> That the � -uiance will only grant the subject property the same general <br /> rights enjoyed by other property m the same area and zone as the subject <br /> property. <br /> a, Findin : The applicant has stated that the property on the <br /> west and east have rock retaining walls and sim�lar to the <br /> proposed rockery and the one property has a driveway similar <br /> to die�r proposal also. <br /> b, Conclusions: The site to the east of the subject property has <br /> very similar site features. The applicant is propos�ng to closely <br /> duplicate the rockery and driveway combination to access the <br /> subject property. <br /> Criterion No. 4: <br /> That the variance is the minimum necessary to allow the subject property <br /> the general rights described in Criterion 3. <br /> e, Findin : See Criteria#3. <br /> b, Conclusions: See Criteria#3 <br />