Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br /> <br />Councilmember <br />findings of fact: <br /> <br />moved the adoption of the following <br /> <br />I1. That the Applicant has applied for a Board of <br />i varianoe to encroach on the required side yard setback. <br /> 2. That the Applicant appeared before the Board of <br /> <br />Adjustment <br /> <br /> Adjustment <br />for a public hearing on July 23, 1985, and that said public <br />hearing was properly advertised and that the minutes of said <br />public hearings are hereby incorporated as a part of these <br />findings by referenoe. <br /> <br />3. That the Applicant's property is Lot 2, Block 1 Oxbow <br />Addition and is located in the MRB Multiple Residential Business <br />District. <br /> <br />4. That the adjacent property to the south of the subject <br />property is single family residential. <br /> <br />5. That the subject property is approximately 3.76 acres in <br />size. <br /> <br />6. That the Applicant's request is to construct two multiple <br />residential units, one eighteen unit and one eight unit with the <br />south side of the eight unit structure encroaching on the <br />required side yard by 20 feet. <br /> <br /> 7. ~hat the City Gode requires that in oases where an MRB use or <br />I district is located adjacent to a single family residential <br /> district, a buffer area of 40 feet shall be provided between the <br /> <br /> t~o uses and/or districts. <br />I 8. ~flat due to the setback requirements from the river on the <br /> subject property, there are exceptional, unique or .extraordinary <br />i circ~stanoes or con, t ions applying to the property in question <br /> as to the intended use of the property that do not apply <br /> generally to other properties in the same zoning district. <br /> <br />I 9. ~hat such varianoe may ~ necessary for the preservation and <br /> enjoyment of a substantial property right similar to that <br /> <br /> possessed by' other properties in the same Jdistrict and in the <br />I same vicinity. The possibility of increased financial return <br /> shall not in itself be ~ed sufficient to warrant a varianoe. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />10. That the authorization of such variance will not be of <br />substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not <br />materially impair the intent or purpose of this ordinance or the <br />public interest. <br /> <br /> <br />