4302 GRAND AVE 2018-01-02 MF Import

4. There are two (2) single family residences approved on a short plat for the property in front of Mr. Gemmill's proposed residence. 5. He is a property owner in the area and wishes to improve the area not deter it. G. Mr. Gemmill is asking for only one house on an oversized lot. There were a number of the neighbors who objected to Mr. Gemmill's variance request. Their remarks concerned the following: 1. No sidewalks or stop signs at 43rd & Grand. 2. Mr. Gemmill was aware that his property was landlocked when he purchased the land. 3. There are traffic congestion and problems now and the street itself needs improvements. 4. The children are and will be in greater danger with increased traffic. After visually viewing the subject property and considering all the facts and 4:estimony, it was moved by Mr. Black, seconded by Mr. Kristiansen, and unanimously carried to grant the applicant's request for the following reasons: 1. One more additional residence will not significantly increase the traffic hazard on Grand Avenue. 2. As determined from the testimony of Mr. David Brandvold, the property lying east of the subject property will not be developed into any more than two (2) homes and so our variance is so conditioned. 3. Mr. Gemmill's request complies with Section 15.04.370 which says: (a) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circum- stances or conditions applying to the subject property or as to the intended use thereof, that do not apply generally to othei properties in the same vicinity or zone. (b) That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the appellant possessed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity or zone. (c) That the authorization of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property in the vicinity or zone in which the property is located. (d) That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan. -3-