2701 18TH ST 2016-01-01 MF Import

The applicant has constructed a driveway off Fulton and a cement slab on the entire south twenty five fezt of the lot. He is no;a proposing to construct a twenty foot. by twenty-two foot carport or. the slab. The total square footage of the proposed carpc�rt is 440 square feet which exceeds the 184 square feet c� accessory buildings permitted by code by 139 percent and covers 24 percent of the lot area. The carport would cover 52 percent of the rear yard area instead of the 50 percent allowed by code. The t_otal lot coverage for all b�:ildings permittPd in this zone is 40 percent or a minimum of 1750 square feet The existing sinqle family residence covers 39 percent of the lot. With the addition of the carport the total lot coverage would be 63 percent plus the additional paved area for the driveway but would be under the minimum 1750 square feet. b. Conclusion: There are exceptional circumstances applying to the subject property since it is nonconforming for lot size and set�acks and therefore cannot meet code requirements f�r the carport, and also to the proposed use do to the fact that it is located across the street from a use that has intensive parking needs which limits the availability of on-street parking. Criterion No. 2- That such variance is necessary for the preservation and en- joyment of a substantial property right of the appellant pos sessed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity or zone. a. Findina: The Applicant contends the variance is necessary in order to provide off-street parking and protection for their vehicles as others do, and that there is little off-street parking available because of the location directly across the street of the Thirty-Four Oakes Fellowship Hall which does not have adequate off-street paz•king. b. Conclusion: Granting this variance would allow the applicant to have a property right possessed by others in this vicinity and zone. Criterion No. 3: That the authorization of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property in the vicinity or zone in which the property is located. a. Findina: The Applicant has submitted a'�Pro�erty Owners OK" sheet signed by ten other residents in the area (Exhibit 5). The City has received three letters in opposition to the request (Exhibit 6). Reasons for opoosing the variance request cited in the letters were that too much of th� .lot would be in buildings, the Applicant constructed the cement slab and the curb cut without obtaining permits. The Public Works Department could find no record of permits being obtain.ed for construction of the curb cut and also stated that ii the variance were yranted the carport must be set back a minimum of 18.5 feet from the back of the side walk to the front of the carport.