HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-Variance Justification
Plan to Permit, LLC
www.PlanToPermit.com
george@PlanToPermit.com
206-909-2893
Angelea Weihs, Associate Planner
City of Renton
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
RE: Seminoff Sunset Blvd Variance at 8xx SW 4th PL (214370-1845)
November 11, 2018
Dear Angelea:
Below are the criterion of approval for a variance (in bold) per RMC 4-9-250.B.5, followed by a response on how the
application meets the criterion (in blue italics):
A. That the applicant [i] suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship and the variance is necessary because
of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings of the subject property, and [ii] the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject
property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone
classification;
Responses:
i. The site is only 33.23 feet to 20.63 feet deep. The site also fronts two rights of way, which further results in a
reduced building pad due to the secondary front setback requirement. Without approval of a variance from the
standard setback requirements, the narrow depth of the lot would prevent the placement of a single family
residence on the lot. Therefore, the size, shape, and location between two rights of ways is unique and considered
special circumstances.
The limited size and shape of the buildable area makes it difficult to provide the usual appurtenances and accessory
uses of a house, including, but not limited to, a garage. These appurtenances and accessory uses are allowed uses
(rights and privileges) granted by the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-2-060.Q) and enjoyed by other property
owners in the vicinity and R8 zone. Additionally, Washington State has determined that a garage is reasonable use
of the property, and is justification for the need of a variance (Washington State Shoreline Hearings Board Case
SHB95-006; Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I, Case No. 74435-6). The proposed variance is necessary
for the placement of a garage and associated single family residence. Therefore, the existing building pad size,
building pad shape, and topography results in practical difficulties for the placement and design of a single family
residence, when considering the existing street setbacks.
The strict application of the setbacks are not necessary to maintain life safety. Please see the responses to the
second criterion of approval, below, for further discussion.
ii. The site is located in the R8 zoning district, which allows 50% building coverage (RMC 4-2-110A). The standard
setbacks would not allow any building coverage as the primary and secondary front yard setbacks overlap.
Therefore, the standard setbacks deprive the subject property owner of a right and privilege (building coverage,
primary use, accessory uses, etc), which is enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under the identical
R8 zone classification.
11/11/2018 Page 2 of 2 Plan to Permit, LLC
B. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated;
Response:
The new home will comply with the latest building code, fire code, and other life safety standards. The latest
stormwater requirements will be complied with for the proposal, which has higher stormwater standards than older
homes that were developed in the vicinity.
The reduced setbacks would easily allow for the clear vision area, as prescribed in RMC 4-11-030, to be met. It should
be noted that the current asphalt is more than 21 feet from the property line. The house would be set back an
additional 5 feet from the property line. Thus, the clear vision area is greater than the minimum 20’ required by the
code for a corner.
Therefore, granting the variance will not be injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone as the
proposed home will not impact the existing uses or potential uses of the adjacent properties.
C. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other
properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated;
Response:
The criteria for approval states “with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone”. The
underlying zone is R8, which allows single family homes as a use. The proposed variance would allow a single family
residence, and accessory uses, consistent with other uses in the vicinity and the zone.
D. That the approval is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose.
Response:
The reduced setbacks are the minimum necessary to allow for a garage, and meet the Renton design requirements
for it to be recessed.
We also note that the proposed house design has a smaller building footprint than any other building in the vicinity,
based on King County Department of Assessments data.
Thank you for your time, attention to this letter, and assistance. Please feel free to contact me at
george@plantopermit.com if you have any questions or need any additional information.
Sincerely
George Steirer
Plan to Permit, LLC