HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraftJULY 2, 2020
ITEM NO. 2 Z-9164-B
File No.: Z-9164-B
Owner: Robert & Marilynn Palmer
Applicant: Jacob White Construction, Jacob White
Address: 2122 N. Palm Street
Description: Lot 6, Block 5, Country Club Heights Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254(d)(3) to allow a carport addition with a reduced rear
yard setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter,
dated June 29, 2020.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Engineering Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 2122 N. Palm Street is occupied by a recently
renovated one-story single family residence. An addition to the rear of the home was
completed in 2017/2018 (BOA Item No. Z-9164.) A former accessory structure/shed
was removed from the rear yard as part of the above-mentioned improvements. Said
rear yard consists predominantly of concrete pavement, accessible via a paved alley
adjacent to the rear (west) property line. The subject lot is bounded on either side
by single family residences.
The applicant proposes to construct a 25-foot by 20-foot (500 SF) carport, attached
to the rear of the home and open on three sides. In September 2017, a variance
request for a 30-foot by 24-foot (720 SF) carport addition was approved by the Board
of Adjustment (BOA Item No. Z-9164-A,) although the owners chose not to proceed
with the improvements. The current variance request is necessary because the prior
approval expired in late 2019. Notably, the presently requested carport structure is
roughly 30 percent smaller than previously approved by the Board. A small portion
of the proposed carport will lie outside of the rear yard and is, therefore, not subject
to this report.
Section 36-254(d)(3) states, “There shall be a rear yard setback having a depth of
not less than twenty-five (25) feet.” If the proposed carport were not attached to the
home, it would be considered an “accessory building” and permitted “by right” to
occupy 30 percent of the rear yard. The subject request proposes to occupy
approximately 36 percent of the rear yard, which staff regards as visually negligible
and reasonable. Furthermore, if an accessory (detached) garage structure were
proposed upon the subject site, a zero setback from the rear property line would be
permitted due to the presence of the adjacent alley right-of-way.
The proposed carport and rear yard encroachment will likely have no adverse impact
on adjacent properties or the overall neighborhood, and staff supports the requested
variance to allow a reduced rear setback for the attached open carport.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance, based on the
with the condition that no accessory structures be located on the subject property.
No closer than 6’ to the west (rear) property line.
Carport shall be open on three