PROJECT NO. 06-0200799 VARIANCE AND SECOND DWELLING UNIT

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is for the City Council to consider an appeal of the Planning Board�s decision to deny Project No. 06-0200799 variance and second dwelling unit. The variance is a request for approval of a second dwelling unit without the addition of an on-site parking space and for a portion of the proposed second dwelling unit to encroach 10 feet into the 15 foot required rear yard setback. The appeal was received from the applicant, Zahira Fazilat who stated that she intends to move back into the main dwelling and move her mother into the second dwelling unit. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. The Planning Board was unable to make two of the four findings required for approval of a variance and voted to deny the project by a 5-0 vote.

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:

Project Description and History:

The applicant is requesting approval of a 500 square foot second dwelling unit which would include a 235 square foot addition to the existing 265 square foot un-permitted second dwelling unit (Exhibit 1). No permits were found for the existing 265 square foot structure. In order to approve the Second Dwelling Unit, a Variance must be approved for the absence of an additional parking space required for second dwelling units and for the addition to encroach 10 feet into the 15 foot rear yard setback.

The existing 265 square foot structure contains a bedroom, a � bathroom, and a kitchen. The addition would add a living room to the structure and increase the size of the kitchen. The applicant intends to reside in the main dwelling and have her mother reside in the proposed second dwelling unit. The applicant requests a variance to forego the additional car parking space requirement, as the existing garage is attached to the main dwelling by an enclosed patio which does not allow for an additional parking space without demolition of the patio and a portion of the main dwelling. The applicant states that she would utilize the existing garage for her vehicle and the proposed second dwelling unit will be for her mother, who does not drive and will not require a parking space.

The Planning Board denied the project because they could not make two of the four findings required for approval of a variance. On July 10, 2007, the applicant appealed this decision (Exhibit 4).

Planning Board Deliberations and Decision:

On June 25, 2007, the Planning Board held a public hearing to consider a request by the applicant. The Board voted 5-0 to deny the variance application (Exhibits 2 and 3). The Board did not find any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances with the project that did not apply to other properties within the vicinity and zone. The Board felt that denying the project would not be denying a specific property right. The Board noted concern over the fact that the applicant knew the unit was not legal yet the applicant made no attempt to legalize it until a complaint was made. The Board inquired as to what it would take to legalize the existing second dwelling unit portion and it was explained by staff that the structure and addition would have to go through the regular inspection and permit process.

Three people spoke during the hearing; all three opposed the project based on concerns over increased traffic and compounding the already congested parking situation in the neighborhood.

Issues Raised by the Applicant/Appellant:

Prior to and at the Planning Board meeting the applicant stated that she would live in the front unit and her mother would live in the second dwelling unit. This would allow her to care for her ailing mother yet give her the ability to maintain some independence. Because her mother no longer drives, the appellant stated that an additional parking space is not needed. She also stated that there have been concerns over her tenants disrupting the neighborhood and if the second dwelling unit were approved she would live in the main dwelling, eliminating tenant turnover issues. She further stated that parking is not an issue on this block and she is therefore requesting that the Council reverse the Planning Board�s decision and approve the variance and second dwelling unit request.

Without approval of the variance, the second dwelling unit application must be denied.  Code requires an additional parking space for second dwelling units and the applicant requests that the two existing parking spaces be considered adequate for both the main residence and the second dwelling unit. The applicant also requests that the second dwelling unit be permitted to encroach 10 feet into the required 15 foot rear yard setback. Staff believes that the standards required to approve the second dwelling unit could be made if the variance was approved.  Staff, however, is in agreement with the Planning Board that two of the four required variance findings (findings 1 and 2) cannot be made.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Board decision to deny Project No. 06-0200799 variance and second dwelling unit.

LIST OF EXHIBITS:

Exhibit 1           Planning Board staff report dated June 25, 2007 including all exhibits

Exhibit 2           Planning Board Resolution #3089 dated June 25, 2007

Exhibit 3           Planning Board minutes from the June 25, 2007 public hearing

Exhibit 4           Appeal form submitted by Zahira Fazilat

go to the top