HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6372 Staff AnalysisAugust 25, 1997
No.. 12
File No.
Owner•
Address•
Descriytion•
zoned•
Variance Reciuested:
Justification:
Z-6372
John Mason
5313 "C" Street
Lot 4, Block 15, Pfeifer's Addition
R-3
Variances are requested from the
accessory building setback and area
coverage requirements of Section
36-156.
Applicant's Statement: Recently we
have received a notice from
Department of Neighborhoods and
Planning regarding a carport which
was constructed in approximately
January 1997 by J. B. McPherson --
a contractor from Ferndale, AR. My
wife and I entered into an
agreement with Mr. McPherson to
build a carport for approximately
$5,000 in payments to Mr.
McPherson.
Mr. McPherson represented to us
that he is licensed contractor with
the state of Arkansas and that he
had been a homebuilder for 20 years
and built numerous properties in
the area. Being a busy person I do
not have time to go check everyone
else's work. I did however ask Mr.
McPherson for a drawing of the
property to be constructed. The
setback which he shows on the
sketch shows one foot between the
property line and the edge of the
carport. I asked him if this would
meet all city requirements and he
told me that it would meet all such
requirements.
When Mr. Ervin Tester, L.R. city
inspector, came to my residence.he
told me that the setback
AucJust 25, 1997
Item No.: 12
requirement would be three feet
instead of the one foot.
When we bought this property it was
a H.U.D. foreclosed home and was in
very bad repair. My wife and I
have spent in excess of $25,000 on
repairs to fix the property up and
build the fence and the carport.
We relied upon a contractor who
obviously did not know city codes.
The carport is open on the east
side facing the structure on the
property adjacent to ours. We do
not believe it is a fire hazard
because firefighters could easily
pull hoses between our carport and
the next door garage in case of an
emergency. We are willing to leave
the carport open on that side in
order that firemen may be able to
move the hose in and out.
For all of the reasons stated above
we respectfully request a variance
so that we do not have to move a
structure which has improved the
value of our property and the
properties around us.
Present Use of Property: Single Family
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Comments:
Stormwater may not run off onto neighbor's property.
Recommend gutter and downspout on carport to direct runoff
away from adjacent property.
H. Staff Analysis:
In January 1997, the applicants had a 22 foot by 24 foot
carport constructed on their R-3 zoned property located at
5313 "C" Street. The structure has a side yard setback of 1
foot and occupies more than 30 percent of the required rear
yard. The code requires a side yard setback of 3 feet and
limits the area coverage to 375 square feet. 456 square
feet of this 528 square foot structure are located in the
required rear yard. The applicants hired an out of town
2
August 25, 1997
Item No.: 12 (Cont.
contractor to build the structure. The contractor did not
obtain the required permits and did not build the structure
to comply with Zoning.Ordinance regulations. Once notified
of the violation, the applicants filed with the Board of
Adjustment for a variance.
Staff believes the variance requests to be reasonable. The
property had no on-site parking other than an unwieldy
shared driveway arrangement with the adjacent property.
This new carport provides 2 on-site parking spaces, taking
access from the alley. The structure exceeds required
setbacks in all cases but on the one side. The area
coverage in the required rear yard is 36 percent, only
slightly above the 30 percent allowed by ordinance.
Due to the close relationship between this structure and a
garage on the neighboring property, staff believes it is
important that the east and south sides of the structure
remain unenclosed to provide unimpeded access. The
applicants have agreed to this stipulation. Indeed, the
only enclosure of the structure is trellis work on the west
side and a portion of the north side.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side yard setback
and area coverage variances subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
1. The east and south sides of the carport are to remain
open and unenclosed.
2. Guttering and downspouts are to be placed on the carport
to prohibit water runoff onto the adjacent property.
3. No portion of the structure (including eaves, guttering
or downspouts) is to extend beyond the property line.
4. Building permit must be obtained.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(AUGUST 25, 1997)
The applicant, John Mason, was present. There were no objectors
present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of
approval, with conditions.
Mr. Mason stated that he understood staff's recommendation and
had no problem with the conditions recommended by staff.
The question was called and a vote taken on the variance requests
subject to compliance with the conditions noted in the staff
recommendation. The vote was 8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent,
approving the variances.
3