Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7687 Staff AnalysisAUGUST 30, 2004 ITEM NO.: D File No.: Z-7687 Owner: Levelle and Sycrece Thomas Address: 6904 Azalea Drive Description: Lot 299 and part of Lots 298 and 300, Cloverdale Subdivision Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a carport structure with reduced front setbacks and separations and which crosses a platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single-family residential Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT Single-family residential A. Public Warks Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 6905 Azalea Drive is occupied by a one- story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide concrete driveway from Azalea Drive which serves as access. The applicants recently placed a 20 foot by 20 foot metal detached carport structure within the front yard, over a portion of the driveway. The carport structure is located approximately six (6) feet back from the front property line, seven (7) feet from the side property line, and is separated from the house by approximately 6.5 feet. The carport structure is not permanently mounted, and is located almost entirely between the 25 foot front platted building line and the front property line. Section 36-156(a)(2)b. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum six (6) foot separation between accessory buildings and AUGUST 30, 2004 ITEM NO.: D (CON'T. principal dwellings. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. requires a minimum front setback of 60 feet for accessory buildings, and Section 36-156(a)(2)f. requires minimum side and rear setbacks of three (3) feet. Section 31- 12(c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that variances for encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicants are requesting variances to allow a reduced front setback for the carport structure and the structure's encroachment across the front platted building line. Staff does not support the requested variances. Staff feels that the front yard encroachment, as proposed, will be out of character with this single family neighborhood. When staff made an inspection of this property, a close look was taken at all of the residences along Azalea Drive to the east and west. Staff could find no other properties along Azalea Drive with encroachments similar to the one proposed. All of the residences along Azalea Drive basically line up with setbacks of at least 25 feet from front property lines. Staff feels that the proposed carport structure will have an adverse visual impact on the surrounding properties. 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 carport structure. 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 Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the requested variances for placement of the carport structure. Board of Adiustment: (July 26, 2004) Sycrece Thomas was present, representing the application. Based on the fact that only three (3) Board members were present, the Board offered a deferral to the applicant. Ms. Thomas requested to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. A motion was made to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The application was deferred. K AUGUST 30, 2004 ITEM NO.: D CON'T. Board of Ad'ustment: (August 30, 2004) Sycrece Thomas was present, representing the application. There was one (1) person present in opposition. Staff presented the item, with a recommendation of denial. Sycrece Thomas addressed the Board in support of the application. She noted that none of the neighbors had a problem with the carport structure. She explained that the carport structure was needed to keep her vehicles out of the weather. She stated that there were other carport structures in the neighborhood. Vice -Chairman Francis noted that staff's opposition was to the reduced setback, not the type or style of the structure. He stated that he could not support the variance request. Chairman Gray asked if there were any other reasons for the carport, other than just protection of the vehicles. Ms. Thomas stated that there were no other reasons. Chairman Gray noted that he was not in support of the application. Troy Laha addressed the Board in opposition. He explained that the proposed encroachment of the carport structure was out of character with the neighborhood. There was a motion to approve the application, as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 4 nays and 1 absent. The application was denied. 3