PC-2008-15, PAP-116 (PV-167), PAUL ESSER

Resolution No. PC -2008-15 Page Three property for those using the stop sign. The increased height in hedges also offers a noise buffer to cars passing by at that intersection. The Traffic Division has stated that the height of the hedges does not obstruct views or create a line -of -sight issue at this intersection. The minimum lot width for corner lots in the R-1-6,500 zoning district is 80 feet; however, the subject property measures at 72 feet. Since the site is substandard in width, it reduces -the standard side yard setbacks of that lot. Reducing the side yard setbacks for the two accessory structures and the pool would allow the owners to recapture some of the width area and would also bring the lot closer to the development standards for that zoning district. With the exception of the request for a variance for side yard and rear yard setbacks to accommodate a second accessory structure located in the side rear yard, which will have to be moved forward three feet to meet the five-foot rear yard setback requirement, there are special circumstances applicable to the property, which, with the strict application of the provisions of this chapter, would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications. Therefore, this finding can be made. 2. The granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation on other properties classified in the same zoning district. In order for this finding to be made, there must be a relationship between the unique site and the variances in question. As stated above, the property is unique in that it is a substandard corner lot that abuts an eight -foot tall soundwall and has mature landscaping in the rear yard, which creates a unique situation where requests for reduced setbacks are typically supported, given that the soundwall would not impact neighbors and the existing vegetation provides screening. The granting of a variance to reduce setbacks is consistent with previous approvals in neighboring properties. With the exception of the request for a variance for side yard and rear yard setbacks to accommodate a second accessory structure located in the side rear yard, which will have to be moved forward three feet to meet the five-foot rear yard setback requirement, the granting of this variance will not constitute a special privilege to the homeowner that is inconsistent with other variance approvals granted for properties is the same zoning district. Therefore, this finding can be made.