The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZ-7526 Staff AnalysisNovember 24, 2003 ITEM NO.: A File No.: Z-7526 Owner: Robert B. Wooley Address: 5216 "R" Street Description: Lot 17, Block 1, McGehee Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow an accessory building with a reduced side yard setback and which exceeds the maximum coverage allowed. 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 R-2 zoned property at 5216 "R" Street is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car driveway from "R" Street which serves as access. There is an alley located along the north property line. There is an existing wood deck on the rear of the structure, with a carport/storage building at the northeast corner of the house. The existing carport/storage building is located 23 feet from the rear property line, with a 0 foot setback from the side (east) property line. The applicant proposes to remove the existing deck and carport/storage building and construct a new 24 foot by 48 foot garage building. The garage structure will be located five (5) feet from the rear property line, November 24, 2003 ITEM NO.: A one (1) foot from the side property line and 12 feet from the existing house. The garage will occupy 38 percent of the required rear yard. The applicant proposes to access the garage utilizing the existing driveway from "R" Street, as well as the alley along the north property line. Section 36-156(a)(2)f. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side yard setback of three (3) feet for accessory buildings. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. allows an accessory building(s) to cover a maximum of 30 percent of a required rear yard. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards. Staff is supportive of the requested coverage variance, but not the variance for a reduced side yard setback. Staff feels that a one (1) foot side yard setback will not allow enough space for construction and maintenance of the structure. Staff could support a 1.5 foot side yard setback (to include overhang, but not guttering) for the proposed structure. Staff feels that this would allow adequate spacing along the east property line, as there is an existing accessory structure immediately to the east which is located 2 — 2.5 feet from the dividing side property line. Otherwise, staff feels that the proposed garage will have no adverse impact on the area, and will be typical of the accessory structures found along the alley within this block. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the application, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 27, 2003) Staff informed the Board that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the application be deferred to the November 24, 2003 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the November 24, 2003 agenda by a vote of 5 ayes, and 0 nays. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff, which reduces the size of the proposed accessory building from 24 feet by 48 feet to 25 feet by 43 feet. The applicant has noted that the accessory building will be a two-story structure. The applicant has also slightly altered the proposed location of the structure. With the reduction in size and altered location of the proposed accessory 2 November 24, 2003 ITEM NO.: A (Cont. building, the previously requested variances for rear yard coverage and side yard setback are no longer needed. The proposed structure is now located three (3) feet from the side (east) property line and covers exactly 30 percent of the required rear yard (375 square feet). The only variance associated with the proposed accessory building has to do with the structure's overall size. The proposed two-story structure will have an overall area of 2,150 square feet. The existing one-story residence (principal structure) is 1,550 square feet in area. Section 36-2 (definition of an accessory building) of the City's Zoning Ordinance reads as follows: "Accessory building or use means a building or use which: (1) Is subordinate to and serves a principal building or principal use; (2) Is subordinate in area, extent or purpose to the principal building or principal use served; (3) Contributes to the comfort, convenience or necessity of occupants of the principal building or principal use; and (4) Is located on the same zoning lot as the principal building or principal use." Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from paragraph (2) of the accessory building definition, to allow the accessory building to be 600 square feet larger than the principal dwelling. Staff does not support the requested variance. Although there are a number of rather larger accessory buildings in the general area, staff feels that the proposed accessory building is too large for the lot and the general area. Staff could support a variance to allow the accessory building to have a footprint of 20 feet by 40 feet or 1,600 square feet total. Staff feels that this size building will be much more compatible with the general area. Revised Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested accessory building variance, as filed. 3 November 24, 2003 ITEM NO-, A (Cont. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 24, 2003) Robert Wooley was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the revised application, with a recommendation of denial. Robert Wooley addressed the Board in support of the application. He presented photos to the Board of 15 other accessory buildings in the area. The photos were briefly discussed. He noted that he had talked to neighbors in the general area and had received no adverse comments regarding the proposed accessory building. He presented an additional letter of support from a neighbor. Chairman Ruck asked Mr. Wooley to describe the proposed use of the structure. Mr. Wooley stated that the downstairs would be a garage and storage, with the upstairs being used as a woodworking shop. He noted that the structure would not be used as an accessory dwelling. He noted that the structure would have windows, and that the garage could be accessed from the alley and "R" Street. Ben Freasier, the immediate neighbor to the east, addressed the Board in support of the application. He stated that the new accessory building would improve his property and the neighborhood. Jacob White, the immediate neighbor to the west, also addressed the Board in support. He noted that he had no concerns with the size of the proposed structure. He stated that he was only concerned with building's appearance, and after talking to Mr. Wooley, he was supportive of the construction. Fred Gray asked Mr. Wooley why he needed such a large accessory building. Mr. Wooley explained that he had wide vehicles which needed to be parked in the garage. There was a general discussion related to the building design/window design as discussed by Mr. Wooley and the neighbors. Staff noted that a specific building or window design would not be enforceable. Mr. Freasier and Mr. White stated that they had no problem with the design being a private agreement. Staff noted that the City would not be a party to the private agreements. There was a motion to approve the application, as revised by the applicant. The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 0