Laserfiche WebLink
Site Plan & Nonconforming Use Variance Review – Jamatar II LLC and Everest Properties LLC <br />Planning Commission Report; 11-17-20 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Page 12 <br />(cont.) b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to this <br />property that were not created by the landowner? <br />Staff Analysis: The current landowners are not responsible for the current <br />building or parking space locations. Again, approvals dating back to before <br />the current zoning code was adopted resulted in this very unique set of <br />circumstances. Criteria met. <br />c. Will the parking location variance, if granted, alter the essential <br />character of the locality? <br />Staff Analysis: No. The area in question is largely unseen from surrounding <br />properties. Amending parking areas to create a muntually beneficial and <br />efficient use of land between property owners is in all parties best interest. <br />Criteria met. <br />4) Is the parking location variance being sought solely to improve the value of <br />the property? <br />Staff Analysis: No. The variance is being sought to ensure all businesses have <br />access to convenient parking, and that land in this area is efficiently utilized. <br />Criteria met. <br /> <br />Nonconforming <br />Use Analysis: <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Because this proposal is seeking to maintain and possibly expand an existing legal <br />nonconforming use (parking with setback and a building within setbacks), the <br />additional provisions of Section 8-640 regarding Type 4 Nonconforming Uses also <br />come into play. <br /> Subsection (1) is satisfied as it requires the landowner to undertake this <br />nonconforming use variance procedure. <br /> Subsection (2) states that approval to change the legal nonconforming use can <br />only be granted if one or more of the following conditions are met: <br />a) The total number of nonconformities is reduced; <br />b) The impact of any nonconformity on adjacent properties is reduced to the <br />greatest extent practicable; <br />c) The extent of any nonconformity is reduced where practical. <br />With regards to Building A being located within side yard setbacks, eliminating or <br />reducing the nonconformity is not practical, and therefore staff finds it meets the test <br />for a Type 4 nonconformity. <br />