5114 NARBECK AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

�. � The footprint of the building covers only 24 percent of the lot. On October 13, 1987, the Planning Commisaion recommended to City council that certain changes be made to the 2oning Code in regard to groas floor area ratio and height of buildinga. Their recommendation ia to eliminate the groea floor area ratio requirement and inatead place a maximum building coverage of 35 percent for the R-S zone. 2. Conclueion: There are esceptional circumstances relattng to the grose floor area ratio requirement and the variance requeated ie consiatent with the proposed code changea. D. Height Limitationa: 1. Findings:: The lo[ alopes to the east and the applicant will ' excavate additional material to take advantage of prr iding additional living apace on a lower level that aould othecKriae require fill or be an unuaeable high crawl epace. The Planning Commisaion hae recommended to City Council that ' , the code be changed to allor a height of 28 feet in thie zone as meaeured from the natural topography. City Council ie expected to take final action on the proposed ordinance changes ' in mid-November. If they concur with the Planning Commiaeion'e recommendation, the applicant would be able to obtain building I permita for these plana as related to grosa floor area ratio and height xithout obtaining a variance. 2. Conclueion: There are exceptional circumatancea in regard to the proposed height of the structure eince propoaed code ' changes Would allow this height in the near future. Criterion Nu. 2: Thar auch variance ie necessary for the preaervation and � i enjoyment of a aubstantial propertp right of the � agpellant possesaed by the ownera of other properties in ' the eame vicinity or zone. !i A. Front Yard Requirement: 1. Finding: Other houaes along this atreet meet the front aetback , �i requirement and future development to the south will also have a 25 foot front setback requirement. 2. Conclueion: The variance ia not neceseary for the enjoyment of a aubetantial property right that is already posseased by , othere in thia vicinity and zone. B. Rear Yard: 1. Findinga: Othera along this street meet the rear aetback; however, aince the area considered rear yard actually will function ae a side yard because of the orientation of thie propoaed atructure and the existing etructure to the xeat, it would be reasonable to allow a variance from rear aetback. 2. Concluaion: It would be reasonable to allow a variance for rear aetback aince that area of thia propoeal will function ae a aide yard. -3-