VN-099 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

VN-99 - Paron' Feb 13 p. 2 shape and the required sideyard setbacks it would be hard to provide -the required parking. He stated that he believed a court would find a denial.of the requested variance to be depriving the petitioner of "the-use-of his property." He stated that the petitioner`is requesting. a variance from the provisions of the Zoning Code which forbid parking in front yards and in street sideyards in industrial districts, (Section 10=-110, h) The Planner reviewed the criteria which had to be met for a variance to be granted. y Daniels^commented-that the request seems to meet the criteria for hardship.;. PLANNING COMMISSION' RECOMMENDATION: January 16, 1973 Motion by Daniels, seconded by Partyka to-recommend approval of VN-99. Motion carried 5-0 ADMINISTRATIVE DISCUSSION: The property in question was at one time a triangularly shaped parcel, however, due to Village road construction the corner at. the intersection of First Avenue N.W. and Old Highway No. 8 was cut off and as a result -the property was turned into a 4-sided parcel.. The new side which was created would be considered the front lot line because it is the shortest street side. Previous to the road construction, First Avenue N.W. would have been the front lot line. The Attorney seems to be of the opinion that Old Highway 8 would reasonably be considered the front, Whichever side is considered as the front, a variance is needed to permit parking in the front and $ide yards. A variance would be needed even if the lot had not been changed from three to four sides as a result of Village action. The proposed site plan shows 38 parking stalls. If the shortest side (northerly side)- is considered the front lot line only 13 spaces (along the south lot line) would be permitted without variance. If the First Avenue N.W. side is considered the front lot line, the same parking spaces would be permitted. If Old 8 is the front lots line, 16 spaces along the south property line would be permitted. While the building and plot plans are not being reviewed at this time, we feel the Council should consider the total number of parking spaces- -required and their relationship to the outdoor display area. According to our calculations "the proposed building could need considerably