HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7140 Staff AnalysisJanuary 28, 2002
ITEM NO.: 11
File No..
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Z-7140
Bosley Construction, Inc.
4411 Oaks Bluff Drive
Lot 8, Oaks Bluff Addition
R-2
A variance is requested from
the building line provisions of
Section 31-12, the area
provisions of Section 36-254 and
the floodway setback provisions
of Section 36-341 to permit
construction of a new single
family residence which extends
over a front platted building
line and with a reduced setback
from the rear property line and
floodway.
The applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Vacant single family residential
lot
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residence
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comment.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned lot at 4411 Oaks Bluff Drive is vacant
with some site work having taken place. There are
newly constructed single family residences to the south
along Oaks Bluff Drive and across the street to the
west. There is a large drainage ditch immediately
January 28, 2002
Item No.: 11
north and east of the site. There is an existing wood
screening fence along the property's east boundary.
The applicant proposes to construct a new single family
residence on the site which encroaches slightly over
the front platted building line and is located 15 feet
from the rear (east) property line, which is also a
floodway line. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
variances to allow reduced front and rear building
setbacks, encroachment over a front platted building
line and a reduced setback from a floodway.
The proposed residential structure will extend five (5)
feet over the front platted building line at the
structure's northwest corner with the southwest corner
of the building being located behind the platted line.
The structure will also be located 15 feet from the
rear (east) property line and floodway boundary.
Section 31-12(c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance
requires that variances for encroachments over platted
building setback lines be reviewed by the Board of
Adjustment. Sections 26-254(d)(1) and 36-254(d)(3) of
the City's Zoning Ordinance require minimum front and
rear yard setbacks of 25 feet. Additionally, Section
36-241 (h) (2) a. states that no structure shall be
located closer than 25 feet to an established floodway
line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. The
original plan submitted for this lot had the same house
plan with a 22 foot rear setback and increased
encroachments over the front platted building line. At
staff's request, the applicant shifted the building
back to the 15 foot easement line, thereby reducing the
front encroachments. The front of the proposed house
will now align with the other houses to the south, with
the encroachment over the front platted building line
based solely on the fact that the building line is
curved to correspond to the curvature of the front
property line. With a large drainage area located
along the property's east and north boundaries, staff
feels that the proposed rear yard setback is
reasonable. In addition, Public Works supports the
reduced building setback from the floodway, noting that
access to the floodway for maintenance is gained from
other areas. Staff does not believe that the requested
January 28, 2002
Item No.: 11
variances will have a negative effect on the adjacent
properties or the general area.
If the Board approves the building line variance, the
applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat
reflecting the change in the front building line for
the proposed house. 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 variances'
subject to completion of a one -lot replat reflecting
the change in the front platted building line as
approved by the Board.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JANUARY 28, 2002)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
3