HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6226 Staff AnalysisDecember 23, 1996
Item No.: A
File No.
Owner•
Address:
Description:
zoned:
Variance Requested:
justification:
Z-6226
Ruth T. and Charles Ray Beard
#38 Allyson Circle
Lot 24, Harlton Addition
R-2
variances are requested from the
building line provisions of Section
31-12 and the area exceptions of
Section 36-156 to permit a carport
which is located less than 60 feet
from the front property line and
which is built across a platted
building line.
AV21icant's Statement:. The
driveway where I park my vehicle is
in my front yard and, of course,
the carport is securely anchored
over the driveway. It does not
take any more room than does my
pickup truck, nor does it block
clear view of traffic from either
direction.
There is not enough room for a
driveway to get to the back yard on
either side of the house,
therefore, it would be impossible
to move the carport to the back
yard.
I am retired and 70 years old. My
wife is 65. Neither of us are in
very good health. I bought a new
pickup truck three years ago which
I expect to last me the remainder
of my life. To keep it looking
nice would be impossible without
the carport, due to the many trees
and birds. We never go anywhere
except to church, the grocery store
and to the doctor.
The carport not only protects my
vehicle from the tree sap, birds,
December 23, 1996
Item No.: A (Con
Present Use of Propert
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Report:
A. Engineering Comments:
No issues
B. Staff Analysis:
rain and other elements of the
weather - it looks real nice! It
has been here 3 or 4 years and none
of my neighbors have complained.
Single Family residence
Single Family residence
This issue is before the Board as a result of action by the
Codes Enforcement Staff. The officer discovered the
violation during a routine inspection of the area. There
was no complaint filed by neighbors.
The property at #38 Allyson Circle is occupied by a one
story, brick and frame residence. The house's original
carport has been closed and converted to living space.
Unaware of the regulations against doing so, the applicant
placed an unenclosed, metal carport structure over the
existing driveway, between the house and the street. The
carport has been in place 3-4 years. It is located across
the platted 25 foot building line and has a front yard
setback of approximately 7 feet. The ordinance requires
accessory buildings to have a minimum setback of 60 feet
from the front property line.
The site is covered with many mature trees. The applicant
desires to keep the structure to protect his vehicle from
tree sap, birds and other elements. The carport was placed
over the existing driveway and is located approximately 20
feet from the curb of the street.
Staff believes the variance request to be reasonable.
Should the Board approve the building line variance, the
applicant will have to do a one -lot replat to reflect the
change in the building line. The applicant should review
the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk to determine if
the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested building line and
setback variances subject to the following conditions:
K,
December 23, 1996
Item No.: A (Cont.
1.
MP
The carport is to remain open and unenclosed on all
sides.
A one -lot replat reflecting the change in the building
line as approved by the Board.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 25, 1996)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present.
Staff informed the Board that the applicant had requested that
the item be deferred to the December 23, 1996 meeting.
A motion was made to defer the item to the December 23, 1996
Board meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 ayes,
0 noes, 1 absent and 1 open position.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 23, 1996)
The applicant, Charles Beard, was present. There were no
objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation
of approval, with conditions.
Mr. Beard offered no additional comments other than to say that
he understood staff's recommendation.
A motion was made to approve the requested variances subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in the staff
recommendation. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes,
0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position.
3