HomeMy WebLinkAboutC_Variance Justification_190820_v1
www.PlanToPermit.com
george@PlanToPermit.com
206-909-2893
Angelea Weihs, Associate Planner
City of Renton
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
RE: Benson Trails Variance at 18300 121st PL (07415-0080))
August 20, 2019
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. An entirely unrelated contractor, to the east, constructed a significant portion of a building onto the subject parcel.
Although this eastern building crosses the subject property line, the permit for the eastern building was finaled by
the City of Renton. This intrusion affects the building area for the subject property. The subject property also
contains an ingress/egress easement at the south east portion of the property that further reduces the size of the
building envelope. These unusual, and “special circumstances applicable to the subject property” create practical
difficulties and unnecessary hardship to meet the city’s setback requirements due to the resulting narrow and small
envelope space.
The resulting building envelope, with standard setbacks and the encroachment, is significantly smaller than other
building envelopes. This would significantly impair the ability to provide a single family home and associated
appurtenances that are allowed on the other lots in the vicinity and R-4 zone.
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. Thus, the strict application of the setback standards
make the siting of the home more difficult, and harder, then necessary.
ii. The site is located in the R4 zoning district, which allows 35% building coverage (RMC 4-2-110A). The standard
setbacks would only allow 21% building coverage. The front, rear, and east sides of the 21% area are irregularly
shaped, and result in unfunctional (dead) building space. This is significantly lower than the building coverage
allowed to other property owners in the vicinity and the identical R4 zoning classification. Therefore, the building
encroachment and standard setbacks deprives the subject property owner of a right and privilege (building
coverage, accessory uses, etc.), which is enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under the identical R4
zone classification.
08/20/2019 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. This includes the
minimum required separation between single-family residences, per the codes. The stormwater requirements will be
complied with for the proposal.
The reduced setbacks would easily allow for the clear vision area, as prescribed in RMC 11-30-030, to be met. Thus,
safe ingress and egress is not impaired by the reduced setbacks.
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 R4, 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. The special circumstance is a
result by another property owner, and not the owner of the subject property.
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 information.
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