Loading...
HE 2016-003 Decision Green Shop Setback PASCO VARIANCE HEARING REQUEST FOR VARIANCE ) CASE # HE 2016-003 Raymond Green ) This matter was heard on September 13th, 2016, at Pasco City Hall in Pasco, Washington, at the request of Raymond Green for a Variance of accessory structure setback requirements. Present were David McDonald on behalf of the City of Pasco and Raymond Green, applicant. The following evidence was considered: 1. City of Pasco Staff report together with all exhibits 2. Testimony given at the hearing by Mr. McDonald and Mr. Green. Based on the testimony, the records and exhibits submitted at the hearing, the hearing examiner now enters his: FINDINGS OF FACT A) All American Barns applied for a building permit in behalf of property owner Raymond Green to build a 20' X 40' pole building on the Green property located at 1115 Road 44, Pasco WA On July 13, 2016. B) The application was for a 12.5' tall structure located 10' from the side property line. C) Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.24.050(4)(b) requires accessory structures to be set back 10' from side property lines in the RS-12 zoning district. D) The site plan was approved with the 10' side setback. E) Applicant applied for a variance to the 10' side setback requirement on August 15, 2016, requesting a 5' setback instead. F) Applicant requests a variance to the 10' lot set back to allow the shop to be built next to his home along the North boundary line. G) A variance requires that the three criteria listed below must be answered in the affirmative as per PMC 25.84.020 a. Strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive subject property of rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification due to unusual size, shape, or topography of the site, or location of surroundings. Page 1 of 2 Green Variance Hearing b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. c. The special circumstances applicable to the subject property were not created through the action(s) of the applicant or any predecessor in interest. H) Strict application of the zoning ordinance will not deprive subject property of rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification due to unusual size, shape, or topography of the site, or location of surroundings. I) Granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. J) Any special circumstances which might allow a variance were created through the action(s) of the applicant or predecessor in interest. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The criteria set out in PMC 25.84.020 cannot all be answered in the affirmative. ORDER The request for a variance is denied. Dated this 15 day of September, 2016. Alan B. Gunter—Hearing Examiner F:/W ord/Docs/Pasco.Green.vari ancehearing.docx Page 2 of 2 Green Variance Hearing