HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-083 Findings - FosterBEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 20, 1990
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION 89-223, REQUEST FOR )
A VARIANCE FROM THE REAR YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS TO)
ALLOW FOR A TWO STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATED 10') FINDINGS
FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AT 146 MANZANITA STREET, )CONCLUSIONS
RATHER THAN 20' REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE. ) AND ORDERS
APPLICANT: JAMES AND MARGARET FOSTER )
)
RECITALS:
1) Tax lot 5900 of 391E 5DD is located at 146 Manzanita Street
and is zoned R-1-7.5; Single Family Residential.
2) The applicant is requesting a variance from the rear yard
setback requirements to allow for a two story accessory structure
located 10' from the property line, rather than 20' required by
ordinance. Site improvements are outlined on the site plan on
file at the Department of Community Development.
3) The criteria for a Variance are found in Chapter 18.100 and
are as follows:
(1) That there are unique and unusual circumstances
which apply to this site which to not typically apply
elsewhere.
(2) That approval of the application is necessary for
the preservation of property rights.
(3) That the approval of the application will not
create a negative impact on the development of the
adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent
of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the
City.
(4) That the conditions or circumstances have not been
willfully or purposely self-imposed.
4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held
a Public Hearing on December 13, 1989, at which time testimony
was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning
Commission denied the application as presented, noting that the
applicant had failed to meet the required burden of proof.
5) The Ashland City Council following proper public notice held
a public hearing on February 20, 1990 at which time testimony was
received and exhibits were presented. The City Council granted
the application.
NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Ashland finds and
concludes as follows:
SECTION 1. EXHIBITS
For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the
attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used.
Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S"
Proponent's Exhibits lettered with a "P"
Opponent's Exhibits lettered with an "O"
Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits
lettered with an "M"
SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS
2.1 The City Council finds that it has received all
information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff
Report, public hearing testimony, decision of the Planning
Commission and exhibits received.
2.2 The City Council finds that the request for a
variance from the rear yard setback requirements to allow for a
two story accessory structure located 10' feet from the property
line rather than 20' as required by ordinance does meet the
criteria fora variance outlined in Chapter 18.100.
The City Council makes the following findings:
(1) That there are unique or unusual circumstances
which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere.
A foundation only building permit was granted to the
applicant and based on a good faith misunderstanding by the
applicant, a foundation was built for the purpose of supporting a
two story detached garage. Further, the neighborhood is one
consisting of many older buildings where the current setback
requirements have not been met and that the subject two story
garage fits well into this neighborhood as it has been
constructed. Accordingly, the Council finds that there is an
unusual circumstance in the legally constructed large foundation
and slab which lends itself well for the construction of a two
story structure.
(2) That the approval of the application is necessary
for the preservation of property rights.
The Council finds that the applicant does have a
property right in the large foundation and cement slab and that
to properly use it, requires the construction and permission for
a two story building located 10 feet from the property line.
(3) That the approval will not create a negative
impact on the development of the adjacent uses and will further
the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive
Plan of the City.
The City Council concurs in the findings of the
Planning Commission which were that applicant was to be strongly
commended for designing and constructing a building which
maintains historic integrity of the site and neighborhood.
Rather than creating a negative impact on surrounding use, the
Council and Commission both believe that the structure enhances
surrounding uses.
(4) That the conditions or circumstances have not
been willingly or. purposely self-imposed.
The Council finds that the applicants acted in good
faith and that they did not willfully nor knowingly and purposely
impose the condition upon themselves and that accordingly, the
condition and circumstances were not willfully or purposely
self-imposed.
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1 Based on the record of the public hearing on this matter,
the City Council concludes that the request for a variance from
the rear yard setback to allow for a two story accessory
structure located 10' from the property line rather than 20' as
required by ordinance does meet the required burden of proof.
Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the
proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we
approve Planning Action 89-223. Further, if any one or more of
the conditions below are not performed as required by the City of
Ashland, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 89-223
is denied. The following are the conditions and they are
attached to the approval:
That the applicant sign agreement for the
studio/garage, agreeing to not use the studio as a dwelling unit,
and that no kitchen facilities be installed.
Therefore
#89-223 is approved.
Mayor
City Reco~rder
based on our overall conclusions, Planning Action
Date