2001 VIRGINIA AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

�� ay Azx � H 9Hti � K�n H� �I H 'i1 U1 H Hx C�7 O OHd �ng 47 � Ci �H� z HH g`� H oCCm h7 � M 2H[n H O [n I�� �� �� b. conclusion: There are unusual circumstances applying to the subiect property since the lot is nonconforminq for width, and also because of the SO foot width of the abutting street conich leaves an unusual amount of unused right of way. Cr�teriOn No 2' That such variance is necessary for the preservation and en- joyment of a substantial prop�-ty right of the apQellant. pos sessed by the owners of other pro;+erties in the same vicinity or zone. a. Findina: There are many other homes in the north end that do not meet the ten foot side setback for corner lots and many of thE streets have a g�-eat deal of Unused right of way that is used as �,ard area by the adjoining property. b. Conclusion: Granting this variance would give the applicant a propiarty right enjoyed by others in the vicinity and zone. Criterion No. 3• That the authorizat.ion of such var:an�e will not Ue mat-erially detrimental to the publi.c welfare or injurious Y.o property in the vicinity or zone in which the property is located. a. Findina: If this variance is granted, the subject property aould still have yard areas similar to others in this vicinity and zone. This is not a v.iew area so there is no potential for view blockage. b. Conclusion: Granting this variance would not be injurious to other property in the vicinity and zone. Criterion No. h• That the grantinq of such variance will not adversely affect the Comprehensive Gener�l Plan. a b Findina: The comprehensive Plan designation is single family and the proposed use is single family. C c usion: Granting this variance would not adversely affect the Comprehensiva Plan. RECOMENDATION: APPROVE the variance �s requested by applicant with the follow;ng conditions. 1. Obtain all necess�ry permits. Prepared by \.�,.�X1 %7nd�y Reviewed by �� _ �'�„G