04/05/2022 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

varied would deprive the applicant of the normal rights to use the property that is commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same SF -3 Zoning District without approval and not being required to fully comply with the front and side yard setback ordinance provisions. 4. Public hearing to consider and take action on the petition of Doreen Ruthart of Ron Doe Homes, on behalf of Lisa Bivens, as part of the City's HOME Program, regarding a 1V l " front yard setback variance to the City of Paris Zoning Ordinance Area Regulations, Section 9-501(1) on Lot 17 & 18, Block 12, of Belmont Addition, being located at 1143 E Tudor Street. Andrew Mack, Director of Planning & Zoning, presented case to the board. This case is similar to the previous one as to the fact that the contractor built the home back in the footprint as the previous home to line up with the neighboring houses. Lastly, Mr. Mack stated that the City staff recommends approval based on the staff recommended findings of fact provided in the staff report. Ms. Alsobrook declared the public hearing open. Doreen Ruthart of 420 PR 43375, and applicant added in addition to previous testimony that with the previous applications and this one she no longer wishes to have to go through this process so she will be sure to comply moving forward to avoid delays. No one else spoke in favor or opposition of the request. Ms. Alsobrook declared the public hearing closed. Motion was made by Chris Fitzgerald, seconded by Jerry Haning to approve the 1' l" variance to Section 9-501(1) of the Area Regulations to allow a 231" front yard setback versus the required 25' setback based on the following staff recommended findings of fact. Motion carried 5-0. Staff Recommended Findin s of Fact: 1. The request for variance is harmony with the general purposes and intent of Zoning Ordinance No. 1710, as amended, and will not negatively impact the protection for the adjacent surrounding property. 2. The request is to permit the reconstruction of a residence is not applicable with regard to a non -conforming use due to it being permitted by right in the SF -3 District. There was a previous structure recently demolished on the property under the City's Home Program and it was built in the same approximate location as the demolished structure. 3. There are special or unique conditions of restricted area and physical feature for the new slab that was constructed prior to the form board survey now existing on the subject parcel of land. This is not generally applicable to other parcels of land in the same zoning district. This has caused an unusual and practical difficulty to be in compliance with the provisions