921 WALL ST 2016-01-01 MF Import

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Criterion No. ?: That the variance is necessary because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances regarding the size, shape, topography, or location of the subject property; or the location of a pre-existing improvement on the subject property that conformed to the zoning code in effect when the improvement was constructed. a. F(ndinas: The applicant has stated that the proposed variance is necessary due to the exceptional and extraordinary characteristics of the site. The site measures approximately 30' x 220' totaling approximateiy 6,845 square feet in area. The app�icant has stated that the irregular shape of the lot and the topography ctiange on the northern most portion of the lot, have made it difficult to construct a detached garage which would meet all code required setbacks. The applicant is proposing to construct a 24' x 30' detached garage with a one foot setback off of the eastern property line. The proposed garage can not be located further north on site due to the slope, so it is restricted to the area where the width of the lot is only thirty feet. The City finds that the subject property does contain a steep slope area along the northern portion of the site. The site generally slopes r.orthwest, with the proposed garage located on one of the more level points of the site. The existing house is located forward (south) on the site with little room to maneuver around either side of the structure. Due to the placement of the house on site there is minimal area in front of the residence to construct a garage which would meet all zoning code requirements. The site presently does not have any improved on site parking. By constructing the garege, the owners will be moving toward conformance by providing the code required two on site parking stalis. The existing residence is nonconforming with respect to both side setbacks. The residence is oniy 2 feet off of the eastern property line, rather than the code required 10 feet. If the residence were certified as legal �onconforming with regards to the 2 foot street side setback, the appiicant could propose to expand along that nonconForming setback line with an attached structure, including a garage, without a formal variance. b• Conclusions: The subject site does have extraordinary features, such as its narrowness and steep c�ope area, which limit the options for placement of the garage on site. Criterion No. 2: That the variance will not be materially detrimental to the property in the area of the subject property or to the City as a whole. e• Findings: The applicant has stated the proposed garage would be well inside their existing fenceline, and at ieast fourteen feet from the curb of the Federal Avenue right-of-way. The area immediately in front of the gated area which currently opens into the backyard, has already been striped for no parking, and therefore no (urther reduction of on street parking would occur. The variance is for a ane foot street side setback, in order to maintain a minimum five foot