11/05/2024 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment Meeting November 5, 2024 Page 3 Director of Planning and Zoning, Osei Amo -Men ah presented case to board. There was discussion amongst the board and staff about when the concrete was poured. Sandy Collard of 4280 Sun -rise Drive, spoke in opposition of the request. Stephanie Harris, City Attorney, clarified that even if the applicant had applied for the permit before the structure was erected the same requests would be required, but it would be in advance of the permit rather than after the fact. David Hamilton made note of the 3 inputs received in opposition of the request and I in favor that were included in the memo. No one else spoke in favor or opposition of the request. Public hearing was declared closed. Motion was made by Harley Draven, seconded by Ben Vaughan to deny the variances to the City of Paris Area Regulations and Accessory Building Regulations based on the following findings. Motion carried 5 ayes - 0 nays. Fin4ings 1. The carport structure setbacks cannot be met. 2. The lot has to be replated. 3. The request for variances is not in harmony with the general purposes and 'Intent of area regulations for accessory buildings in residential and apartment districts contained in the Zoning Ordinance 171 o Subsection 13 -101. (a, b, & c), and will not protect the character of the immediate vicinity of the area. 4. Apart from the variances sort in the required lot front yard, building separation and side yard set back requirements, there are no special and unique conditions of restricted area of lot width, that exist on the subject parcel of land, which are applicable to other parcels of I f land in the SF -3 Zoning District, and which cause unusual and -practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the use of the property with site improvements permitted by the ordinance with the provision sought here to be varied. The residential lot is consistent with the adjoining residential lots. S. The hardship sought to be avoided is the result of (a) the applicant's own actions (self- imposed or self-created), and no (b) economic or financial "hardship." 6. Thep rovision of the ordinance regulation that are sought to be varied, does not deprive the applicant of reasonable rights to use the property that are commonly enjoyed by other residential properties in the SF -3 Residential Zoning District which are required to comply with these same ordinance provisions. 5. Adjournment.