HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/02/1981
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Port Angeles, Washington
4It March 2, 1981
I CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Lindberg called the meeting to order at 7 PM.
I I ROLL CALL
Members Present: James Rexroat, william Lindberg, John
Lacey, Evelyn Tinkham
Members Absent: James Clevenger
Staff Present Dan VanHemert, Louise Frost
III APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mrs. Tinkham moved to accept the minutes of the January
5tfi" I meeting as submitted. Mr. Lacey seconded the motion,
which passed unanimously.
.
IV COHMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
None
V VARIANCES
V-81(2)6 - JOHN WEBB & LOUIE TORRES. Request for
a variance reducing the required area for con-
struction of a duplex from 10,500 square feet to
9,600 square feet. Location: West of 181S East
Third Street. (Continued from February 2, 1981 -
no quo"rum.)
Mr. VanHemert reviewed the staff report; Chairman Lindberg
opened the public hearing.
.
.
John Webb said that the Planning Commission had recommended
approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a duplex. The
requested adjustment of a specific regulation is justified
in that in the RS-7 and RS-9 zones a duplex is permitted
on 1-1/2 lots - a size that would accommodate only one
house. The area proposed for a duplex will permit two
single-family residences. The original two substandard
lots is the "special circumstance". Additionally, there
is an unused 12-foot alley to the north which, if vacated,
would increase the area of the lot. However, since the
alley will be needed for sewer and water line extensions,
the owners have elected not to vacate and then have to
.
.
.
.
Board of Adjustment
March 2, 1981
Page 2
give the City easements for the maintenance of those
utilities.
Mr. Webb said it was very important to observe that the
Staff advised the use of the parcel for a duplex would
not be detrimental to the public welfare. Granting the
requested variance would not be a grant of special privi-
lege. The two under-sized lots would accommodate a more
intensive use than the proposal. So far as setting a
precedent by approving a smaller lot size for a duplex,
there are many duplexes existing prior to the passage of
the zoning Ordinance which are located on 7,000 square
foot or smaller lots. The 10,500 square-foot figure is
arbitrary.
Louie Torres displayed a sketch of the site. The parcel
consists of two RS-7 lots of 4,800 square feet each, which
is a special circumstance. with respect to a special
privilege, it will not increase the density; will not
depreciate the neighborhood; will not do anything detri-
mental to the community. Two 26-foot units will be built -
either separated by 14 feet (two 7-foot side yards, which
are not usable for anything) or attached, with more recre-
ation space, light and air. The requested variance is not
a special privilege - it would not hurt the community.
The applicants are providing more than 1-1/2 lots for a
duplex.
Chairman Lindberg asked if the proposal was for a duplex,
or for a condominium. Mr. Torres responded that the pro-
posed two-unit structure would probably he a condominium
because the neighbors would not like two rental units.
Chairman Lindberg closed the public hearing.
Mr. Rexroat moved to grant the variance reducing the re-
quired area for construction of a duplex from 10,500 square
feet to 9,600 square feet, for the following reasons:
1. The variance is not detrimental to the public.
2. Two separate structures could be built on the lot
proposed for the duplex, both of which would ac-
complish the same purpose.
3. with the area of the unused, unusable alley in-
cluded, the lot area would be sufficiently close
to the required minimum lot size; therefore, the
alley would be a special circumstance connected
with lot size.
Mrs. Tinkham seconded this motion, which passed 3 - 1, with
Mr. Lacey voting "no", because the reduction is not consis-
tent with other construction; and it appears to he a grant
of special privilege. The reduced lot size is not for the
good of the area.
Board of Adjustment
1-1arch 2, 1981
Page 3
.
V-8l(3)7 - JIMMIE & DARLENE JONES. Request for a
variance reducing the 25-foot front and rear yards
to 8 feet on the north and 14 feet on the south;
to locate an existing single-family residence.
Location: Lauridsen Boulevard and Tenth Street.
Mr. VanHemert reviewed the staff report, including the vari-
ance granted in January. Chairman Lindberg opened the pub-
lic hearing.
Otto Ehlen, 920 East Boulevard, said the owners on the south
side of Boulevard were opposed to the original request (in
1979) which was rumored to be a 30-foot high residence.
Their only concern is to beautify the presently poorly-kept
triangle, and they would accept a bungalow. James Perszyk,
925 East Tenth, said his house is much closer to its east
line than they knew; therefore, Mr. and Mrs. Jones have
agreed to place the house farther east on their lot to pro-
vide more separation between houses.
.
Mr. VanHemert said that he had received a telephone call
from Mr. Patterson, 932 East Boulevard, who had objected in
writing at the January hearing; and then read their earlier
letter into the record. Mr. Patterson added his concern
for the lack of sidewalks and resulting hazard to school
children.
Darlene Jones said that the setbacks would be considerably
greater at the west end of the proposed house - 30 feet at
the southwest corner - and reduced to the requested 8 and
14 feet only at the eastern, or narrow end of the lot. The
house to be sited on the lot is only 21 feet high; and al-
though it is 20 feet wide, the 24 feet on the site plan in-
cludes the eaves. Chairman Lindberg closed the public
hearing.
Mr. VanHemert read the supplemental report from the City
Engineer recommending that the sewer be off Race Street
interceptor and that access to the lot be from Tenth Street
rather than the Boulevard. Mrs. Tinkham asked if the Joneses
would require additional ditching to handle the runoff from
the lot; and Mr. VanHemert said that the City did not men-
tion a drainage problem, if any exists.
Mrs.
foot
. feet
. l.
2.
Tinkham moved to grant the variance reducing the 25-
front and year yards to 8 feet on the north and 14
on the south, for the following reasons:
The shape of the lot is a special circumstance.
The variances would not be a grant of special privi-
lege, since other houses in the vicinity and zone en-
croach upon either or both yardS along the Boulevard.
.
.
.
.
Board of Adjustment
March 2, 1981
Page 4
3. The variances are not injurious to the community,
and the City is better served with a nicely main-
tained house on this now overgrown and weedy lot.
Mr. Lacey seconded this motion, which passed unanimously.
V-81(3)8 - RONALD E. BRADSHAW. Request for a vari-
ance increasing the 30% lot coverage to 34.5%; to
reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 18 feet;
to reduce the side yard setback from 7 feet to 6
feet; to construct an addition to a single-family
residence over an existing concrete pad. Location:
1638 West Twelfth Street.
Chairman Lindberg, ,:reading Staff memo, said no action would
be taken on this matter tonight. The application will be
amended and reposted and republished.
V-8l(3)9 - FRED C. GRINNELL. Request for a variance
to reduce the IS-foot alley setback to 12 feet; for
a partially constructed condominium building. Loca-
tion: Southwestc"orner"," Thirteenth and "en Streets.
Chairman Lindberg excused himself on the appearance of fair-
ness and left the hearing room.
Mr. VanHemert reviewed the staff report. Mrs. Tinkham asked
if some builders would start construction before everything
was in order; and Mr. VanHemert replied that that was not
the case here. Vice-Chairman Lacey opened the public hear-
ing.
Fred Grinnell said the original sketch by the architect was
in error. He obtained his building permit, set the founda-
tion forms and was told by the Building Inspector to pour.
It wasn't until they had completed the first floor of the
building that the Building Inspector found the rror.
Mr. VanHemert said this was not a common occurrence. Vice-
Chairman Lacey closed the public hearing.
Mr. Rexroat moved to approve the variance to reduce the 15-
foot alley setback to 12 feet, for the following reasons:
1. It is not a grant of special privilege.
2. It will not create a sight problem at the intersec-
tion of the alley and South "C" Street.
Mrs. Tinkham seconded this motion, which passed unanimously.
.
.
.
.
Board of Adjustment
March 2, 1981
Page 5
VI STAFF REPORTS
None.
VI I REPORTS OF BOARD I-1EMBERS
Mr. Rexroat suggested that the City charge a penalty to
builders who start a jOb and then find out they need a
variance. This might cause builders to do all their
homework first.
VIII ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:10 P.M.
\)(kAJo-.~
Dan VanHemert, Ass't Secy.
Chairman
Tape condition: Satisfactory
LF:DVH:PDC:LF
.
. CITY or POI1T J\NGELJ~S
ATTI:ND!\i\lCr: ROSTI:R
. '. L
Type of Meeting::Eo 4:JJ 0 r A ~.i U.thuruf~ Date:;J -,;(-IL .
Location: /3 i . ()J (/5 Y-- {;t1JIi 5)tyd/-
,
N^ME
. ADDRJ:SS/^Gr:J~CY
.
. .
.. "
.
1
. f
I
i
. .
. . ~
I
J
l
I
~A-" j
,"
. I
I
I
PiV r
? /;-. E fi-z
"
. .
. .
~
-
.
I
,
..,
I
I
-'
I
l
:-J
I
. I
, I
I
.
I
I
I
i
.-.
f
-i
. . . I
, - .
.
.
.
t
-i