HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6349 Staff AnalysisJuly 28, 1997
Item No.: 7
File No.:
Z-6349
Owner:
Grace Moix
Address:
7403 Azalea Dr.
Description:
Lot 35, Cloverdale Addition
Zoned:
R-2
Variance Reggested:
variances are requested from the
area regulations of Section 36-156
and the building line provisions of
Section 31-12 to permit a carport
with reduced street side and front
yard setbacks and which is located
across a platted building line.
Justification:
Applicant's Statement: I would
appreciate your consideration for a
variance to zoning ordinance
Section 36-156. This ordinance
requires that structures must be
set back 25 feet from the property
line. Because of the size and
configuration of my lot, this
ordinance prevents me from covering
my drive.
A couple of months ago, I
contracted out a home improvement
project, part of which involved
covering my concrete drive. I was
hoping not only to make my property
more aesthetically pleasing but
also wished to provide my parents
with a sheltered area to park and
to enter and exit the house.
Unfortunately, the contractor who
did the work failed to adhere to
the zoning ordinances of the city.
He also failed to mention any
potential violations. Had I known
that the cover would be in
violation, I never would have
allowed it. As it stands now, I
have an existing carport cover that
has been up since March, only to
find out 3 months later that it is
out of compliance.
July 28, 1997
Item No.: 7 (Cont.
I would appreciate your granting
'relief' from ordinance Section
36-156 so that I might keep my
cover. I'm sure this ordinance has
merit and I know it is intended for
the good of the community. But I
cannot see where my carport cover
poses any 'real' problem, except on
paper. It is very well made and is
placed exactly where it should be,
'logically' speaking (If you were
going to put a carport cover over
my drive, this is where you would
put it). It does not encumber any
lines of sight or traffic, it helps
break up the 'monotony' of the flat
area where my drive is located, and
it is functional in keeping my
mother out of the elements. I have
even invited the neighborhood kids
waiting for the school bus to feel
free to use it as shelter in
inclement weather. There is
nothing to gain by having me remove
the carport cover, but there is
much to lose in many respects.
I hope to continue to improve my
property for my mother and for the
community I want to give my mother
a place to live that she can be
proud of and will accommodate her
in her old age. I want to let the
residents of Cloverdale know that I
plan on being here a while.
Present Use of Propertt : Single Family
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
No issues
B. Staff Analysis:
This issue is before the Board as a result of action by the
Codes Enforcement Staff.
E
July 28, 1997
Item No.: 7 (Cont.
The applicant has recently had a 24 foot by 27 foot metal
carport structure placed on the R-2 zoned property located
at 7403 Azalea Drive. The structure has a 31 foot front
yard setback from the property line on Azalea Drive, a
street side yard setback of 7± feet from Sunflower Drive and
is built across a platted 25 foot building line. The
ordinance requires accessory structures to have minimum
front and street side yard setbacks of 60 feet and 15 feet
respectively.
Staff believes the variance requests to be reasonable. The
house at 7403 Azalea had no covered parking. The carport
was placed over the existing driveway area. The structure
is unenclosed and does not appear to create any visibility
or sight distance problems. Although the structure has a
street side yard setback of only 7± feet (15 feet required),
it does have a setback from the curb of Sunflower Drive of
17-18 feet. This provides for adequate maneuvering room for
vehicles backing out of the structure. The structure
maintains the same front yard setback as the house and the
reduced front yard setback is not that visually obtrusive.
If the Board approves the building line variance, the
applicant will have to do a one lot replat reflecting the
change in the building line. The applicant should review
the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to
determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of
Assurance.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested front and street
side yard setback and building line variances subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
A one -lot replat reflecting the change in the building line
as approved by the Board.
The carport structure is to remain open and unenclosed on
all sides.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JULY 28, 1997)
The Chairman asked staff to present the item. Richard wood, of
the Staff, offered the variance and Staff Recommendation which is
approval of the application with several conditions. The
Chairman then asked if the applicant was present.
Grace Moix came forward and briefly addressed her application.
At the conclusion of her comments, the Chairman noted there were
no objectors present. After a brief discussion, the Chairman
�3
July 28, 1997
Item No.: 7 (Cont.)
asked for a motion on the application.
approve the variance as requested subject
conditions. The motion passed by a vote
1 absent.
4
A motion was made to
to the staff
of 8 ayes, 0 nays and