PC 13-22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT A FINDINGS FOR DENIAL 27640 Sherlock Road — File # VAR22-0003 1. With regard to the Variance (VAR22-0003) to allow for proposed development exceeding MDA, the Planning Commission finds in accordance with Section 10-1.007(2) as follows: a. That, because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the provisions of this title is found to deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. The maximum development area (MDA) formulas were created with consideration of a project site's specific size and topography. In particular, Lot Unit Factor (LUF) and the multi -tier MDA calculations factor in the development constraint of steep slopes, which has been recognized to be a comprehensive, scientific, objective, and fair standard in the Town for the past few decades. Therefore, the topography of the lot does not constitute circumstances that make the subject property unique. Strict application of the adopted MDA calculation to the subject property does not deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in the entire Town. The property owner would continue to enjoy the use of the subject property even without the construction of the deck at issue; as explained below, the property is already developed with a primary residence and associated amenity features. The residence was also constructed pursuant to the granting of a variance previously by the Town, which took into consideration the site topography and characteristics that supported said variance and allowed the property owner to make use of the site. Specifically, during the Planning application review for the main residence (251-13-ZP-SD-GD-VAR), a Variance Approval was granted to reduce the front setback. However, the previous property owner did not discuss any unique characteristics or circumstances with the Town regarding MDA calculation, nor request to increase the lot MDA for the then proposed development (Attachment 4, Staff Report for File #251-13- ZP-SD-GD-VAR). However, he was found to build the subject deck and patio without permits, exceeding MDA threshold he agreed upon. Per Section 10-1.1007(2), "violations are not practical difficulties or hardships justifying a variance," even for the current owner who inherited the violation. Although unique site constraints requiring longer than average driveways or fire apparatus turnarounds could justify a necessary MDA Variance, the subject Variance request is not caused by a mandatory requirement, such as driveway or fire apparatus turnaround in a particular size and location. Given there is an existing deck permitted and built to the north of the subject deck and patio plus a flat grassy area, legalizing the unpermitted decks and patios through a Variance request are not necessary for the property owners to enjoy the property. The area underneath the unpermitted deck and patio is relatively flat to accommodate the same outdoor activities with or without the decks. For these reasons above, staff does not support the malting of this finding as there is no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, as demonstrated by the facts presented, that Resolution PC 13-22 Page 2 of 3