Findings - CC - 1993 - variance - Variance To Side Setbacks From 20' To 10'/Stager Front/Back/Lots
CITY OF EAGLE
IN THE !lATTER OF
EAGLE WING DBVELOPJlBHT
AN APPLICATIOII FOR A
VARIANCE
)
)
)
PINDIIIGS OF FACT
AND COIICLUSIOIIS OF
LAW
On March 1, 1993, pursuant to public notice and hearing procedures
set forth in Section 67-6509, Idaho State Code, and Section 8-7-4-2
City Code, the applicant William J. Korby, owner of the property,
applied for a Variance to side setbacks from 20 Ft. to 10 Ft on
units 1,2,5,10,11,14,&15, and rear setbacks from 25 Ft to 15 Ft on
units 6,7,8,&9, for the purpose of enabling the builder to stagger
the buildings in the multi family development rather than creating
a "barracks" appearance. The 15 4 plexes is on 4 acres, and has a
density of 3.75 lots per acre (15 dwelling units per acre). Multi-
family units-4 Plex-60 units, 30 2 bdrm & 30 1 bdrm, 60 covered
parking and 60 uncovered parking plexes. The proposed development
was approved by the Eagle City Council on November 10, 1992. The
application is now before the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission
for the City of Eagle, Idaho, for consideration for said Variance.
Based on testimony from the applicant and all interested parties,
together with all documentary evidence submitted concerning the
application, the Eagle 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, including Eagle Sewer District, Eagle Fire District,
Central District Health, and Ada County Highway District. The
City was advised by said entities that subject to certain
conditions there was no objection application.
2.
On March 1,1993, public hearing proceedings were conducted by
the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission. There was no
testimony on the proposed Variance request. The Commission
continued the hearing until March 15, 1993 in order to get a
legal opinion on posting of property.
3.
On March 15, 1993, the hearing was resumed. It was determined
by legal council that no posting was required by State law in
a Variance request, and the application was considered at this
time.
4.
The proposed location for the development is bordered to the
East, West and South by an R5 district I to the N by an R5
district and the Seventh Day Adventist Church;
5.
The standards used in evaluating the application are in the
following sections of the Eagle City Code and Comprehensive
Plan:
8-7-4-2:
VARIANCES
A. Authority to Grant Variances: The 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 I a literal enforcement of the provisions of this Title
would result in unnecessary hardship. No nonconforming use of
neighboring lands, structures or buildings 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 result from the actions of
applicant I (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.
PRACTICAL POINTERS
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.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the foregoing findings of facts the Eagle Planning and
Zoning Commission concludes that the recommendation to Council for
the applicant's request for a Variance should be denied.
1.
The application submitted by William J. Korby for a Variance
is not in accordance Eagle City Code, Section 8-7-4-2 and does
not serve the welfare of the general public and public
interest;
2.
The granting of the application may violate the Idaho Code and
does nullify the interests or purposes of the Eagle City code.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the application
be denied as there are no safety, unique features of the land,
nor is there a hardship to warrant a variance.
ADOPTED by the Eagle Planning and zoning Commission of the City of
Eagle, Idaho this ~ day of April I 1993.
APPROVED:
KEN SMITH
CHAIRMAN I EAGLE PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
ATTEpT~' \
/ì
! ~~~+z \
A BARA MONTGOMERY,
CITY CLERK