Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7385 Staff AnalysisApril 28, 2003 ITGAA kin • R File No.: Z-7385 Owner: Matthew and Susan Jeter Address: 15 Ranch Valley Road Description: Part of Lot 29, Pine Manor Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from Section 36- 254 to allow a carport addition with reduced side and rear yard setbacks. Justification: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Single Family Residential Single Family Residential The property at 15 Ranch Valley Road is occupied by a 1 '/z story brick and frame single family residence. A circular driveway from Ranch Valley Road serves as access. The applicant proposes to construct a 20 foot by 26 foot carport addition on the east end of the existing structure. The proposed carport will be constructed to match the existing house, with the north, south and east sides of the carport structure being unenclosed. The carport will have a side yard setback ranging from one (1) foot to 1.7 feet, and a rear yard setback of 20 feet (same as existing house). Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side yard setback of eight (8) feet and Section 36-254(d)(3) requires a minimum April 28, 2003 Item No.: 6 (Cant. rear yard setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards. Staff does not support the variances as requested. Although staff has no problem with the requested rear yard setback, staff cannot support the proposed side yard setback. Staff feels that the proposed carport structure should be set back at least three (3) feet from the east side property line in order to address issues related to maintenance, overhang and water run-off. The applicant has obtained a letter from the property owner to the east (Nancy Monroe), who approves of the proposed carport addition. A copy of the letter is attached for Board of Adjustment review. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the setback variances as requested. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2003) Matt Jeter was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff briefly described the application, noting a recommendation of denial of the requested side yard variance. Staff expressed no problem with the requested rear yard variance. Staff noted that the applicant had not completed the notifications to surrounding property owners as required. Staff noted that Mr. Jeter had hand -delivered copies of the notice form to the surrounding property owners, but had not obtained their signatures. Staff also noted that 5 of the 15 property owners were notified two (2) days late. Mr. Jeter explained his process to the Board and why he completed the notification as he did. He stated that he had to go out of town and was two (2) days late in notifying some of the surrounding owners. Chairman Ruck asked Mr. Jeter if he did notify all property owners within 200 feet of his property. Mr. Jeter noted that he did and explained. There was a motion to waive the Board of Adjustment Bylaws and accept the notification as completed by Mr. Jeter. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. Chairman Ruck expressed concern with the proposed side yard setback. He asked Mr. Jeter what his reasons were for requesting the reduced side yard setback. 2 April 28, 2003 Item No.: 6 (Cont Mr. Jeter explained that there was not enough driveway (maneuvering) space to use the existing garage on the east end of the house. He stated that he could provide a two (2) foot sideyard. Fred Gray stated that a three (3) foot side setback would give approximately 18 feet of carport width. He asked Mr. Jeter if he could work with that dimension. Mr. Jeter responded that he could. Fred Gray, Andrew Francis and Chairman Ruck indicated that they could support a three (3) foot side setback. Cindy Dawson, City Attorney, explained that Mr. Jeter would need to amend his application to provide the three (3) foot side setback. Mr. Jeter stated that he would amend his application accordingly. There was a motion to approve the amended application, providing a three (3) foot side yard setback, with the following conditions: 1. The carport structure must remain unenclosed on the north, south and east sides. 2. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto adjacent property. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. The amended application was approved.