HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3882-A Staff AnalysisSEPTEMBER 25, 2006
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z -3882-A
Owner: Rolfe Buntaine
Applicant: Rolfe Buntaine
Address: 1201 Kavanaugh Blvd.
Description: Part of Lots 9 and 10, Block 9, Midland Hills Addition
Zoned: R-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
255 to allow a deck addition with a reduced side setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
1. As shown on the proposed site plan, the deck projects into the right-of-
way approximately 3 feet. The deck should be removed out of the right-of-
way.
B. Staff Analvsis;
The R-3 zoned property at 1201 Kavanaugh Blvd. is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame single family residence. The property is located at the corner
of Kavanaugh Blvd. and Charles Street. There is a lower level garage at the
north end of the house, as the property slopes downward from front to back
(south to north). There is a two -car wide driveway from Charles Street leading
to the lower level garage.
SEPTEMBER 25, 2006
N'T.
The applicant recently constructed a 12 foot by 28 foot deck (uncovered and
unenclosed) on the west side of the residence, as noted on the attached site
plan. The deck is located at the upper level of the house over the garage. The
deck extends over the driveway, across the side property line, and
approximately three (3) feet into the right-of-way of Charles Street. When the
City's enforcement staff observed the deck construction, a stop work order was
issued.
Section 36-254(4)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of five(5) fleet for this R-3 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the deck addition with a zero (0) side setback,
extending approximately three (3) fleet into the right-of-way.
Staff does not support the requested variance, Staff does not believe this type
of encroachment into the right-of-way is reasonable. Staff believes this type of
encroachment above a public rig ht-of-waylsidewalk represents a liability for the
City. As noted in paragraph A. of this report, the Public Works Department
notes that the deck should be removed from the right-of-way. In addition to the
right-of-way issue, staff feels that no reduced setback should be allowed for
the deck. Given the irregular lot shape, the existing house is already out of
alignment with the other residential structures along both sides of Charles
Street to the northwest. Allowing additional building coverage within this side
setback will only exacerbate the situation. Staff believes the proposed deck
encroachment will have an adverse visual impact on the properties in this
general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested setback variance.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(SEPTEMBER 25, 2006)
Rolfe Buntaine was present, representing the application. There were no objectors
present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial.
Rolfe Buntaine addressed the Board in support of the application. He described the
proposed deck structure and presented photos to the Board. He explained that he
could remove 2.5 feet of the deck structure without moving the existing Poles. He noted
that the deck was not that visible because of existing trees and other landscaping, and
would not have an adverse visual impact.
2
SEPTEMBER 25, 2006
O.: 1 (CON'T.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (CON'T.): (SEPTEMBER 25, 2006)
There was a brief discussion of the deck structure with relation to the side property line.
Chairman Francis expressed concern with the deck being out of alignment with other
residential structures along Charles Street. He stated that he could support a 5 foot
wide deck structure with a 4 foot side setback.
There was discussion of the deck extending past the northwest corner (rear wall) of the
house. Chairman Francis explained that his support of a 5 foot wide deck would be if it
did not extend past the rear wall of the house. There was additional discussion of the
setback issue.
Vice -Chairman Burruss asked if there were any steps to the deck. Mr. Buntaine stated
that there were none.
Fletcher Hanson asked what existed prior to the deck construction. Mr. Buntaine
explained that it was a plywood carport structure with no deck on top.
Vice -Chairman Burruss asked Mr. Buntaine if he would amend the application to have a
6 foot wide deck, with a 3 foot side setback. Mr. Buntaine amended the application
accordingly. There was discussion of a 6' wide deck instead of a 5 foot wide structure.
There was a motion to approve the revised application for a 6 foot wide deck with a 3
foot side setback, subject to the deck structure not extending past the northwest corner
(rear wall) of the house. The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open
position. The revised application was approved. The Board informed Mr. Buntaine that
the deck structure needed to be altered according to the approval within 60 days.
SEPTEMBER 25, 2006
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON
The applicant recently constructed a 12 foot by 28 foot deck (uncovered and
unenclosed) on the west side of the residence, as noted on the attached site
plan. The deck is located at the upper level of the house over the garage. The
deck extends over the driveway, across the side property line, and
approximately three (3) feet into the right-of-way of Charles Street. When the
City's enforcement staff observed the deck construction, a stop work order was
issued.
Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of five(5) feet for this R-3 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the deck addition with a zero (0) side setback,
extending approximately three (3) feet into the right-of-way.
Staff does not support the requested variance, Staff does not believe this type
of encroachment into the right-of-way is reasonable. Staff believes this type of
encroachment above a public rig ht-of-waylsidewalk represents a liability for the
City. As noted in paragraph A. of this report, the Public Works Department
notes that the deck should be removed from the right-of-way. In addition to the
right-of-way issue, staff feels that no reduced setback should be allowed for
the deck. Given the irregular lot shape, the existing house is already out of
alignment with the other residential structures along both sides of Charles
Street to the northwest. Allowing additional building coverage within this side
setback will only exacerbate the situation. Staff believes the proposed deck
encroachment will have an adverse visual impact on the properties in this
general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested setback variance.
2 ` o of {Gl- � S� Bali ,N COvc CJUSQ
4� CA -11 s
2