HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-039 Findings - Freund· ?
BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON
May 2, 1989
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #89-009, REQUEST FOR A )
VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 6' FENCE IN THE SIDE YARD ABUTTING )
A PUBLIC STREET RATHER THAN A 4' AS REQUIRED BY )
ORDINANCE AT 903 PINECREST TERRACE. )
APPLICANT: HENRY FREUND AND CLAUDIA CHOTZEN )
)
FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS
AND ORDERS
RECITALS:
1) Tax lot 2600 of 391E 15BC is located at 903 Pinecrest Terrace and is
zoned R-i-10, Single Family Residential.
2) The applicant-is requesting a Variance to allow a 6' fence in the
side yard abutting a public street rather 4' required by ordinance. A
site plan is on file at the Department of Community Development.
3) Criteria for approval of a Variance are found in Chapter 18.100 and
are as follows:
(1) That there are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this
site which do 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 city Council following proper public notice, held
a Public Hearing on May 2, 1989, at which time testimony
was received and exhibits were presented. The City Council
approved the application.
Now, therefore,
The City Council of the city of Ashland, finds and concludes
as follows:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS
1.1 The City Council hereby incorporates by reference
the Staff Report noted as "Exhibit A", the Site Plan submitted
by the applicant noted as "Exhibit B" and all evidence and documents
submitted either to the Planning Commission or to the City Council.
SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS
2.1 The City Council finds that it has received all
information necessary to make a decision.
2.2 The City Council finds that the request for a Variance to allow
a six (6) foot fence in the side yard abutting a public street does
meet all relevant criteria found in the Variance Chapter, 18.100:
1. Configuration of the Applicant's lot does present an unusual
circumstance which is not typically found elsewhere.
2. Applicant's right of privacy, a property right, does require
the approval of the Variance so as to preserve said property right.
3. The approval of this application does not create a negative
impact on the development of adjacent uses and will further the
purpose and intent of City Ordinances and Comprehensive Plan, in
that it so appears to the City Council and there was no evidence
submitted to indicate any negative impact.
4. The conditions and circumstances were not willfully or
purposely self-imposed in that the conditions consist of the
configuration of the lot which is a natural feature of the land
compared with the boundary lines of the lot which were neither
chosen nor created by the Applicants. The fact that an improper
fence was built by a contractor, does not constitute a willful and
self-imposed hardship, due to the fact that it was done by the
contractor without the knowledge of the Applicants.
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1 Based on the record, matter, the City Council concludes that the
proposal for a Variance to allow a 6' fence in a side yard abutting a
public street does meet the criteria for approval for a Variance.
Therefore, based on the above, Planning Action #89-009 is approved.
Dated this /~ ~.~day of ~/~/~_ .~month,~ 1989
Mayor
city Recorder