Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5861 Staff AnalysisAugust 29, 1994 Item No - 3 File No.: Owne A_ddress: Description: Zoned: Variance Regqested: justification: Present Use of ProT)ert : Proposed Use of Pronerty: Staff Repo : A. Engineering Issues: No engineering issues B. Staff Analys : Z-5861 John Speed 5810 Hawthorne Road Lot 9, Forest Heights Place Addition R-2 From the area regulations of Section 36-254(d) to permit construction of a deck with a reduced side yard setback of 0 feet. It is desirable to maintain the integrity of the deck design by keeping it at'a uniform height. This height provides for an easier transition from the house to the deck at both the side and rear exits. Single -Family Single -Family This issue is before the Board of Adjustment as a result of enforcement action.- The applicant had a deck constructed which extends the Width of the house and wraps around the west side, extending to the front corner of the house. The majority of the deck is approximately 18 inches above grade, with railings above that. Due to the slope of the property, the front corner of the deck, nearest Hawthorne Road, is 2 1/2 - 3 feet above grade. The deck is built to the west property line. A 6 foot side yard setback is required. The deck is built at one level throughout, allowing for easier transition from both the rear and side exits of the house. August 29, 1994 Item No.: 3 (Cont.) There is no visual impact created by the deck since it is hidden by a 6 foot privacy fence. Having to remove and rebuild the portion of the deck which extends into the side yard setback would create a�hardshiP for the applicant. Reducing the side yard for this deck is reasonable and should not have an impact on surrounding properties. The occupant of the residence adjacent to the west has stated that she has no objection to the deck. C. Staff Recommendatio : Staff recommends approval of the requested variance for the deck with the condition that no roof or enclosure be constructed in the side yard setback. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 1994) Terri Duncan, of Archadeck, was present representing the applicant. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Board that the variance request was the result of enforcement action by the zoning Enforcement staff. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, stated that he had spoken with Mrs. Butler, the neighbor adjacent to the west, who stated she had no problem with the deck as it is. Chairman Borchert asked if proper notice procedures had been followed. Mr. Carney responded that all notice procedures had been followed, including the posting of a sign and hand -carrying a notice to property owners within 200 feet. Ms. Duncan addressed the Board and stated thaf she did not intend to violate the code but had constructed the deck unaware of the side yard setback requirement. A motion was made to approve the variance, as recommended by staff. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 2 open positions. I The variance was approved with the condition that no roof or enclosure be constructed in the side yard setback. 2