1976-10-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Pa t 5 The first purpose of Resolution No. 1771 is a Council declaration that the amount of floor area an applicant receives is not determined by caprice, games, or politics. This purpose is accomplished by the following declaration: That the question of the amount of floor area that an applicant receives is not determined by his personal circumstances --we do not determine the question on the basis of "the poor fellow." That the question of the amount of floor area that an applicant receives on a per acre basis is not determined by the size or shape of his property. In fact, the total maximum number of square feet of floor area that he receives is determined by the number of acres of land which he owns. This is of course the fair share as determined by the floor area ratio. It may of course be true that in order to get his fair share of floor area a variance to a secondary zoning regulation is required. This is another question independent of the maximal number.of square feet of floor area which is allowed. That the question of the amount of floor area that an applicant receives is not determined by mitigating circumstances -- we do not determine the question on the basis of "it doesn't matter down there because that's near Old Highway Eight" or on the basis of "it doesn't matter in this case because the railroad tracks provide open space." The resolution, however, does not completely neglect the possibility that the City Council may want to make such a determination. It simply states that if the Council does so it will do it legislatively so that all of those who are similarly situated may also.benefit. That the question of the amount of floor area that an applicant receives depends on how many acres of land that he owns and what district his property is located in. THE FLOOR AREA RATIO IS A DISTRICT STANDARD. The resolution goes on to state that basic fairness requires that the floor area requirement be enforced uniformly in the district, and that there must be some compelling reasons to violate this basic requirement of fairness. The only two compelling reasons that the City Council could identify are as follows: 1. A threat to the public health safety and general welfare or 2. A governmental taking of property without just compensation, if such would occur by enforcement of the floor area ratio requirement.