Laserfiche WebLink
Remington Builders <br />April 5, 1984 <br />Page 3 <br />From a practical standpoint it may appear a variance is warranted for <br />the lot in question. However, from a technical aspect there do exist <br />building configurations which would fit on the lot, either reducing or <br />eliminating the need for a variance. The applicant has ruled out a <br />smaller dwelling or a two-story dwelling based on the aesthetics of the <br />surrounding area and the existing market of home buyers. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION <br />The Planning Commission has recommended approval of VN-231 based on the <br />following: <br />1. That the area may have been platted with a misunderstanding <br /> on t he setback require ments from the cul -de-sac. <br />2. That the configuration of the cul-de-sac is A-symetrical <br /> and is not similar to other cul-de-sacs in the City. <br />3. That there are only th ree points of the proposed dwelling <br /> that protrude into the setback area. <br />4. That the proposed home is of comparable size and value of <br /> the surrounding area. <br />5. That the applicant has demonstrated uniq ue and unusual <br /> circ umstances and undu e hardship for the variance. <br />STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />Based on the technical aspect of a variance it is staff's contention <br />that there do exist development alternatives for the site and therefore <br />undue hardship has not been proven. Staff recommends denial of VN-231.