Laserfiche WebLink
nrr,1:G, Oil.`; OF APPLICANT <br />POINT 1. The following are the special circumstances Which apply <br />tolny property which deprive me of riyl;Ls and privileges rhich -Ire <br />enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under the identical <br />zone classification. <br />The area of the property in question is very close to that required for five units. <br />The zoniag of adjacent property on Colby B-1 and property within@ two blocks on Wetmore <br />Y.9 c <br />R-4 way suggest that a variance increasing allowable units from 1r� to'3.0 would not be <br />inconsistent with long-range development of this vicinity of the city. <br />POINT 2. The variance I am recucsting will not be detrimental to <br />the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvemelits <br />in the vicinity of a zone in which my property is located because: <br />Should the Board act favorably on this request. I would plan to begin construction <br />of a five -unit structure a soon as possible. Again, since cote would presently allow <br />construction of 4=9 units, I feelthat granting of the variance would be neither <br />detrimental nor injurious. <br />POINT 3. If this variance is not granted, an unnecessary hardship <br />Will continue to the owner of this property, the cause of which is <br />beyond his control because: <br />With favorable action by the Board, Construction of the Duildina which I Yaw is <br />wind would add appreciably to the development of this area. My hope is to develop the <br />property to its greatest potential and limiting construction to 4 units when present <br />'Y.979 <br />code would.allow " units would fall short of that potential. <br />POIt;T 4. So as not to grant a special privilege to me by thc.granti.ng <br />o! this variance I submit the following conditions to be imposed so <br />as not to cause inconsistencies with the ].imitations upon other <br />properties in the vicinity and zone in which I am located. <br />I an aware of a variance ranted to Mr, Robert O'Couner in April, 1975, wkich__ <br />allowed construction of a 10-unit structure on property at 3829 Colby which, ly code, <br />would have'allowed only 9.7 units. I would have no o'ojecti.onoto other orooert', <br />oanors.bein. _11 similar minor v riinces. <br />