Laserfiche WebLink
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT <br /> FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER <br /> (Variance �?29-84) <br /> Based upon the written request for a variance from the City�s soni\ <br /> code, specifically 18.44 5 19.12.030, made by <br /> David 9ranvold a 3620 Upland A�� <br /> -Urive hereinafter referred to as "App <br /> licant," the Board of ' ment, <br /> ublic hearin on said a plication held on October 1, 1984, an�i <br /> following a p g P <br /> further having reviewed all [estimony, oakes the following Findings, <br /> Conclusions, and Order: <br /> FINDIP]GS AC�D CONCL06IDN5: <br /> 1, That there have been exceptional or extraordinar� clrcumstances or <br /> conditions applying to the subject property or as to the intended u�e <br /> thereof [h.3t do n��t apply generally to other properties in the same <br /> vicinity ur zone. <br /> a, Finding: The applicant o�an� a parcel of property whicli is <br /> located at 3620 Opland Ave. The applicant's property ccnsists of <br /> a 148 foot by 358 foot lot wiCh a single family residence. The <br /> proposed short subdivision has two lots frontin,�, on the street <br /> with the third lot using the proposed 20 [oot easement. <br /> I, b. Conclusiun: The applicant's property does ontain enough land <br /> � area for three lots (1.29 acre)• � <br /> � The authorization of the variance will not be detrimental Co the public <br /> � welfa[e or in,jurious to the property in the same vicinity ot zone. <br /> a, Finding: The proposed lots are 12,500 square feec, 14,752 square � <br /> feet and 28,451 square feet. r. <br /> r: <br /> b, Conclusian: The proposed lots have nu effect on the public or " <br /> property in the area. <br /> 3, There are no rea^,onable alterna[ives which would allou for acceptable H <br /> design of the short subdivision in accordance with existing standards. H `� <br /> qr <br /> a, Finding: There are no alternatives to a three (3) lot short plat. � � <br /> b, Conclusion: The proposed design allows t.`.e most frontage � <br /> i <br /> possible for a two or three-lot short plat. � <br /> 4. The applicant's request for a short subdivision has been processed by � <br /> r� : <br /> [he City who conf.irms that the final approval cannot be granted without � . <br /> an authorized variation from the Board. � ( <br /> . a, Finding: The applicant has not filed a short subdivison with the C (. <br /> City. - � <br /> licant has � <br /> �;, _ <br /> b, Conclusion: This condition cannot be met until t e apP , <br /> :Cled a sltort subdivision with thc City. � ; � <br /> � : <br /> Fd <br /> � ' <br /> ` ; . <br />