Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> b. Conclusion: Since the site is vacant, it should be possible <br /> to design a project to meat zoninq code requirements, and the� <br /> conclusion is there are no tinusual or extraordinary circum- <br /> stances applying to this property that do not apply generally <br /> to the vicinity and zone. <br /> Criterion No. 2: <br /> That such variance is necessary for the preservation and en-• <br /> joyment of a substantial property right of the appellant possessed: <br /> by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity or zone. <br /> a. Findina: The subject site is part of a small area zoned R-3 <br /> in the Plat of Valley View, the majority of which is zoned <br /> R-1. The existinq multifamfly structures to the enet and <br /> west are providinq setbacks to code and are not built out to � <br /> the maximum density permitted, as they� are providinq mora <br /> than 3500 square feet of lot aren per dwalling unit. <br /> b. conciusion: Grantinq this variance is not necessary for the <br /> preservation and enjoyment of a aubstantial property riqht of : <br /> the appellant possessed by the owners of other propertiee in � <br /> the same vicinity and zone since other multifamily structurae � <br /> in the aren are meetinq zoning code requirements. <br /> Criterion No. 3• <br /> That the authorization of such variance will not be mete•cially <br /> detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to proparty in tha � <br /> vicinity or zone in which the property is located. <br /> a. :'�iII�inq,;, The site plan submitted shows no amanities such as <br /> usabie open spnce and a front yard free from parkinq, auch ns � <br /> would be suiteble in a low-density multifamily zone adjacent <br /> to an area zoned and huilt out to subatantial sinqle family <br /> homes. <br /> b. Conclusion: Authorization of this variance could be detri- <br /> mental to future tennnts of tne multifamily structures and <br /> also a detriment to the adjacent single family development <br /> � since the front yards would be used for parkinq. <br /> Criteiion No. 4: <br /> That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the <br /> Comprehensive General Plan. <br /> a. Findina: The General Plan designation is multiple family <br /> residential, 15 to 25 units per acre. Policies cite the need <br /> for open space and design quality. <br /> � b. Conclusion: Granting this variance could adversely affect <br /> the General Plan <br /> RECOMffiIDATION: <br /> DSNY TH8 VAlZ7ANCE 1� RROLn+- T� BY Tf� pPL•IC��+'�' <br /> Prepared by „sr�.e. �}'J <br /> Reviewed by <br />