Laserfiche WebLink
*o Board of �djustment <br />FROM Reid H. Shockey <br />o^TE March 28, 1975 <br />s��,E�T Staff Review--Variance Request c��r �,r ��<<:crr ��-�A�,,. 1y,,,<,,,,,�70•, <br />Jehovah's t9itnesse, Church--26th 8 Summit <br />Page 2 <br />B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and <br />enjoyment of a substantial property r:ght ef the appellant <br />possessed by the owners of other properties in the same <br />vicinity or zone, specifically: <br />That the variance would allow tor an ocr.upancy of <br />200 persons which is i�he desired standard of the <br />church. Denial of the vaiiance would reduced the <br />churc:h's ability to meet this demand. <br />C. That the authorization of such varianca will not be materially <br />detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property in <br />the vicinity or zone in which the property is located, specifically: <br />That the net affect of the structure �ituated as proposed <br />would be no different than a building technically fronting <br />on 2Gth Street which had a ten foot setback from Harrison. <br />D. �hat the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the <br />Ccmprehensive General Plan, specifically: <br />I. That the Planning Comnission in approving the proposed <br />facility has implied conformance with the purpose and <br />intent of the general plan and Zoning Code. <br />V1. POSSIBLE STIPULATIONS: <br />A. That the applicant comply with all other• conditions imposed by the <br />Planning Commission and City Council for this facility. <br />VII. STAFF COMMFNTS: <br />The proposed church facili�y underwent an extensive study while it was under <br />��:�'':` consideration by the Planning Commission. As a result of the Commission's <br />discussion with the applicant mutual agreem�nt was reached on a site plan <br />configuration and landscaping plan, ��liich the Commission felt inet the <br />needs of both the applicant and the City, <br />The Staff feels with specific regard to the setback quesiion there is a <br />mere technical point requiring the variance �s was noted above if the iront <br />of the building was interpreted as facing 26th Streat than the structure <br />would exceed the Zoning Code standards on setbacics on corner lots. The <br />net result of granting this variance will be iden�ical to a situation where <br />the front yard did face 26th Street and the impact on the surroundiny <br />area. <br />