Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJ_My_Precious_Home_Lot_Coverage_Justification_210219_v1My Precious Home Variance Request Justification – Lot Coverage Parcel # 3628600007 Lot Size: 5,286 sqft Current Use: Vacant Zone: R-6 Minimum Lot Size: 7,000 sqft Variance Requested: 68.2% lot coverage Variance Request Justification: The applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to the property. 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. City of Renton Zoning Code allows for a total lot coverage of 55% in the R6 zone with a minimum lot size of 7,000 sqft. Based on the minim conforming lot size of 7,000 square feet, lot coverage at 55% equates to 3,850 sqft. The lot size of the subject property is 5,286 sqft, which is 75.51% the size of, and substantially smaller than, the minimum required lot size of 7,000 sqft. Strict application of the 55% lot coverage rule would reduce the available square feet of lot coverage of the subject property from to 2,907 sqft, which is substantially less than the 3,850 allowed and granted by the standard set by the lot size minimum. Strict application of the code denies the subject property of the same privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and in the R6 zone. While the requested total lot coverage of 3,605 sqft represents a greater percentage of lot coverage for the subject parcel than code allows, it remains less than the 3,850 square feet that is allowed if the lot were a conforming lot of 7000 sqft and is the minimum necessary for the subject property to enjoy the same rights and privileges such as the installation of driveways, retaining walls, walkways, porches, stairs, projections and overhangs which enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and in the R6 zone. Granting the variance will: Allow for required and necessary site features for the proposed structure, which are rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity under the identical zone classification, such as: a front porch enhancing the street appeal of the home; a staircase on the rear side of the home for additional fire/safety and ingress/egress from the main living area in the home; installation of site retaining walls necessary to access the garage; 2’ building eaves in- keeping with the architectural style of the home being built. The proposed home and site features for the home do not include any additional outdoor structures or hardscaping outside of what is needed for foot traffic in and out of the home and vehicle traffic in and out of the garage and driveway area. 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 Granting an increased lot coverage is not expected to be/will not be materially detrimental in any way to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity or within the R6 zone. The development as proposed is not expected to diminish surrounding property values in anyway. As proposed in size, height, and location compared to other developments in the community it is substantially similar. The proposed development is contained to the subject property. The proposed development is not expected to significantly impair adjacent view corridors nor is it expected to impose any hardships or injuries to the public or property or improvements in the vicinity or zone. Granting additional lot coverage will not impact the surrounding neighbors from surface/storm water as this property will be connected to the city’s storm drainage system. Except for the concrete walkway to access the front porch, virtually all stormwater that lands on an impervious surface will be directed towards the city’s structures as the driveway slopes towards the home and will have a strip drain to catch water from entering the basement and garage area. 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 subject property is a nonconforming lot and due to size and shape creates significant development constraints. Without relief, application of the specific limitations upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone would pose severe limitations and deny the full use of the subject property. Approval does not constitute the granting of special privilege. This proposal and the relief requested is the minimum necessary for development to be consistent with other development found in the local community therefore it is not a granting of special privilege. Approval of this variance proposal will allow development of a home with a footprint that is slightly smaller than the allowable building area for a lot that meets the minimum lot size requirements in the zone. The approval is the minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. To be consistent with other development found in the immediate community the relief requested is the minimum necessary for development to accomplish the desired purpose. To allow development in a manner that is consistent with other properties in the R6 zone this is the minimum necessary to accomplish the desired purpose. It is the minimum necessary to maintain the character of the localized community and will result in development that is similar in size and shape. This is the minimum necessary to provide reasonable use of the property and is the minimum necessary to develop and maintain use of the property. This is the minimum necessary to be allowed the same rights and privileges that others in the R6 zone have been given. Granting of the variance will: Result in development that has similar characteristics, such as size and design, to other developed lots found within the localized community. Will provide reasonable use of the property in a manner which is the minimum necessary to viably and logically develop and maintain the use of the property. Incorporates development size and location with existing development and is similar in size as other residential development found in the localized community. The additional lot coverage remains under the R6 zone’s allowable maximum lot coverage if the lot was a conforming minimum 7,000 sqft. Conclusion: The Variance requesting relief from maximum lot coverage should be granted. Due to special circumstances applicable to the subject property, such as it’s non-conforming size, and irregular shape, the applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship. Strict application of the code denies the subject property the minimum lot coverage area allowed by other in the same R6 zone therefore the strict application denies the subject property of the same privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and in the R6 zone. The minimum relief requested from lot coverage restriction is not materially detrimental to the public welfare and is not injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed structure and its use is allowed in the zone R6 and consistent with other properties within the localized community, it does not create any prohibited uses, others have been granted similar relief, the proposed development is consistent with the development intensity found in the localized community, the specific design avoids and minimizes impact while maintaining the development standards in keeping with the community. The proposal does not constitute a grant of special privilege. While other lots have the privilege of having a minimum lot coverage area of 3850 sqft, the subject property is requesting 3605 sqft, which is the minimum necessary to will accomplish the desired purpose. We respectfully request the Variance be granted and the lot coverage be adjusted accordingly.