Laserfiche WebLink
y � � <br /> � �:� <br /> ay <br /> � �bx I <br /> a y f�i� �I <br /> y <br /> H -'. H � <br /> fC C] i <br /> '�1 H '�1 I <br /> G] H <br /> � � � plan. It has a lot size of 46.08 feet by 50 feet and a � <br /> y b total lot area of 2,302 square feet. The existing <br /> residence and attached garage was built in 1930 according <br /> H �g to the applicant. The garsge portion of the structure is <br /> Hy � located 2.69 feet from the rear and side property lines. �, <br /> z y The applicant has stated that due to the limited size of I <br /> � F� y the existing lot, an addition to the existing structure <br /> �yv� H would further restrict the usable open yard sFace and <br /> � d�, would be detrimental to the value and appearance of the <br /> � � � prope ty ,I <br />, 3oc�i� b. Conc�us�ons• There are exceptional or extraordinary <br /> circumstances r.egarding the location of the existing <br /> structure which was established prior to the City's <br /> Zoning Code and the limited lot size established through <br />' the short plat process. �I <br />, rr;terion No. 2• I <br /> That the variance will not be materially detrimental to the �i <br /> property in the area of the subject property or to the City as I <br /> a whole. ' <br /> a. Findinas: The existing residence located immediately <br /> east of the subject residence is totally dependent upon <br /> on-street parking. The elimination of any on-site <br /> i ��1 parking for any residence in the area would further <br /> ' ' impact the available on-street parking. <br /> b. Conclusions: The variance should not be materially <br /> I, ��' detrimental to the property in the area of the subject <br />� property or to the City as a whole if on-site parking is <br /> �..� ma:-�tained. Depending on the location of the on-site <br /> , parking, screening may be necessary to reduce impacts to <br /> the residence immediately east of the subject residence. <br /> ' <br /> ��' r`ri trri�n N(i. 3: <br /> ' ' That the variance will only grant the subject property trie same <br /> � general rights enjoyed by other proper.ty in the same area and <br /> �' zone as the subject property. <br /> �� a. Findinas: The applicant ha" stated that there is plenty <br /> e of on-streat parking for the entire neighborhood and that <br /> �' many of the homes in the northend have converY.ed their <br /> '� garages and are using on-street parking exclusively. <br /> � Furthermore, the applicant would still have one off- <br /> �treet parking space. i <br /> The residence immediately east and the residence <br /> immediately west of the subject property appear to be <br /> using on-street parkinq exclusively while the majority of <br /> i <br /> I <br />