Findings - PZ - 1994 - Variance - Variance From 7.5' To 3' On One Side Of Lot
CITY OF EAGLE
IN THE MATTER OF )
DANIEL & PATRICIA)
FRISON AN APPLICATION)
FOR A VARIANCE)
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW
On April 4, 1994, pursuant to public notice and hearing procedures
set forth in Section 67-6509, Idaho State Code, Ernest Phillips,
builder and representative for the applicants, Daniel & patricia
Frison, came before the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission, for
the City of Eagle, Idaho, requesting consideration for a variance
from a 7 1/2 ft side set back to a 3 ft set back on one side of
their lot. The basis of the request is the garage was built to the
3 ft side set back in error due to using the wrong property pin.
Based on testimony from the applicant and all interested parties,
together with all documentary evidence submitted concerning the
application, the Eagle City Planning and Zoning Commission finds
the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1.
The records in this matter indicate all notices, and
publications have occurred as required by law. The records
further reflect notice of the public hearing was sent to the
appropriate public and private entities with responses to the
proposal being received in the City Clerk's office from those
entities. Those responses are as follows:
EAGLE FIRE DEPT: 1. Install address numbers on every building,
house or apartment, so as to be clearly visible from the street.
Numbers shall be a minimum of 3.50" high in accordance with Fire
codes.
The average spacing between hydrants shall not exceed that listed
on table A-I11-B-l-, 1991 UFC
EAGLE SEWER DIST: does not impact any sewer line easements, no
opposition.
2.
On April 4, 1994 public hearing proceedings were conducted by
the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission and testimony was
received. There was opposition from the adjoining property
owner, Sherry Jackson.
3.
The standards used in evaluating the application are in the
following sections of the Eagle City Code.
8-7-4-2:
VARIANCES
_m-- ----- ------- ------ ------- m
A. Authority to Grant Variances: ~he Council may authorize, in
specific cases; such variance from the terms of this Title as will
not be contrary to the public interest where owing to special
conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this Title
would result in unnecessary hardship. No nonconforming use of
neighboring lands, structures or building s in the same district
and no permitted or nonconforming use of lands, structures or
buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for
issuance of a variance. Variances shall not be granted on the
grounds of convenience or profit, but only where strict application
of the provisions of this Title would result in unnecessary
hardship.
B. Application and Standards for Variance: shall not be granted by
council unless a written application is submitted to the
administrator and Council containing:
1. name and address of applicant
2. legal description of property
3. description of variance needed
4. statement that (a) conditions exist which are peculiar to
the land, (b) rights, commonly enjoyed, may be deprived, (c)
special conditions do not results from the actions of
applicant, (d) that granting a variance will not confer on the
applicant any special privilege
a variance shall not be granted unless the Council makes specific
findings of the fact based directly on the particular evidence
presented to it which support conclusions that the above mentioned
standard and conditions have been met by the applicant.
8-7-4-3: Under no circumstances shall the Council grant an appeal
or variance to allow a use not permissible under the terms of this
Title in the district involved, or any use expressly or by
implication prohibited by the terms of this Title in said district.
In granting any appeal or variance, the Council may prescribe
appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this
title. Violation of such conditions and safeguards when made a
part of the terms under which the appeal or variance is granted,
shall be deemed a violation of this Title.
CONCLUSION
A.
Variances deal only with bulk regulations - not uses.
B. To be granted only upon showing of undue hardship because of
characteristics of the site Must not conflict with public interest.
The variance is a mechanism which serves as a safety value to
provide potential relief from impractical and purposeless
application of building bulk and placement requirements. Variances
do not involve land use; but require an applicant to make a
showing of two particular aspects of the proposal. One fact is
that the variance request must be the result of a unique site
characteristic. Court decisions have generally determined that
this unique site characteristic must be one which is natural,
rather than man-made or induced by an owner. Configuration of lot
boundaries, locations of existing buildings, etc. are seldom
considered unique site characteristics. The applicant needs to
show the unique site characteristic and 1. undo hardship because of
the characteristic and 2. that there is harm to public interest
because of the characteristic. The Commission concludes there is
no justified reason for a Variance.
Based upon the foregoing FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW, the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to
the Council the application submitted by Daniel and patricia
Frison for a Variance be denied based on the foregoing
conclusions, in particular the need for the variance was
caused by human error rather than unique characteristics of
this lot.
ADOPTED by the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Eagle, Idaho.
18
day of
, 1994.
This