HomeMy WebLinkAboutJ_Variance_Request_Justification_181109_V1VARIANCE REQUEST JUSTIFICATION
The applicant 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 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;
The existing home was constructed in 1942 with an attached carport structure. The
original attached carport was constructed with a 0-foot setback from the side yard
property line before the property annexed into Renton in 1946.
The original carport became dilapidated over time and replacing it was the best way to
repair the structure. The owners, with the help of family members, tore down the old
carport and rebuilt it in 2017. They were not aware that they needed a building permit
to replace the structure. The rebuilt carport was located with the same 0-foot setback
from the side property line. It was built generally in the same footprint as the existing
carport, however, with a slight expansion to the west, toward Dayton Ave South. This
slight expansion toward the front property line also increased the encroachment in the
side yard. The small area that expanded in the side yard results in the need for a side
yard variance. The change is incremental and is not obvious when viewed from the
street or the neighboring property.
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;
The reconstruction of the carport was an effort by the owners to repair a failing
structure. Since the existing structure was dilapidated and in danger of collapsing,
replacement was determined to be best way to correct the deficiencies in the structure
and keep it in a safe and secure condition. The rebuilt carport results in a slight
expansion into the side yard setback that is not obvious when viewed from the front
1
and side yards, and the new structure improves the appearance of the property. The
requested variance does not result in detriment to the public welfare or injury to any
other properties or improvements in the vicinity or zoning district in which the home is
located. There is a sufficient room between the carport roof and the roof of the home
to the north, as a driveway is located between the abutting home and the property line.
The 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;
The new structure is generally within the same footprint as the previous carport, with a
slight expansion within the front and side yard. The front yard setback is met, and the
nonconforming situation in the side yard is incrementally increased. The original
carport was constructed with a 0-foot setback. As replacement of the failing carport
was the best option for repair, and would likely be allowed for other properties in the
vicinity and R-8 Zone.
The approval is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Amd. Ord.
4835, 3-27-2000; Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012)
The carport as constructed is the minimum needed to accomplish the purpose of
replacing the existing carport. The owners considered alterations to the carport in
order to be within the exact footprint of the previous structure; however, at this
juncture, it would require moving or removing posts needed for structural support, and
to allow adequate space for parking. The requested v ariance is the minimum needed
by the owners to be allowed to retain the rebuilt carport.
2