HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7688 Staff AnalysisAUGUST 30, 2004
NO.: E
File No.: Z-7688
Owner: Manuel and Sonia Castrillo
Address: 16 Timber Lane
Description: Lot 14, Stonegate Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of
Section 36-254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a
carport addition with reduced setbacks 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: Single-family residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analvsis:
The R-2 zoned property at 16 Timber Lane is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide
concrete driveway from Timber Lane which serves as access. The
applicants recently constructed an unenclosed carport structure along
the front and east side of the residence. The structure (support posts)
is located on the east (side) property line, with the roof overlay
extending slightly (6" to 1') over the side property line. The structure is
located approximately 6 to 6.5 feet back from the front property line,
extending across a 25 foot front platted building line.
The structure's support posts are landscape timbers, with 2"x8" lumber
as support beams. There are 2"x4" cross members and a plywood roof.
Heavy plastic material overlays the plywood roof. All of the 2x8 support
beams and 2x4 cross members are spliced together, none are
AUGUST 30, 2004
ITEM NO.: E (CON'T.
continuous wood pieces. The carport structure is 20 feet wide and
extends approximately 23.5 feet from the house toward the front
property line.
Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a
minimum front setback of 25 feet for principal structure in R-2 zoning.
Section 36-254(d)(2) requires a minimum side yard setback of 6.3 feet
for this R-2 zoned lot. Additionally, 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
the carport additions with a zero (0) side setback, 6 foot to 6.5 foot front
setback and the structures 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 mad an inspection of this
property, a close look was taken at all the residences along Timber
Lane to the east and west. Staff observed no other residences along
Timber Lane with encroachments similar to the one proposed. All of the
structures are aligned with front setbacks of approximately 25 feet.
Staff feels that the proposed carport structure will have an adverse
visual impact on the surrounding properties. Additionally, staff feels that
the carport structure is a potentially unsafe structure. As noted above
the cross members and main support beams are spliced together and
not continuous wood pieces. Staff feels that the structure could very
well not hold up with strong winds or heavy snow.
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 addition. 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 associated with the
carport addition.
2
AUGUST 30, 2004
111:1 & 101 ClIff(efel0IN9
Board of Adjustment:
(July 26, 2004)
The applicant was not present. Staff recommended that the application be
deferred 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.
Board of Adiustment:
(August 30, 2004)
Manuel Castrillo and Manuel Castrillo, Jr. were present, representing the
application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item, with a
recommendation of denial.
Manuel Castrillo and Manuel Castrillo, Jr. addressed the Board in support of the
application. They explained that the carport structure is needed to protect their
family and family vehicles. It was noted that Mrs. Castrillo had just had a baby.
They explained that their vehicles needed protection from the many trees on the
property and adjacent property. They noted that a permanent roof could be
constructed on the carport structure.
Chairman Gray noted that staff was concerned with the construction of the
carport structure, and the possible safety concerns related to it.
There was further discussion of the carport structure. Mr. Castrillo, Jr. noted that
there was a similar carport structure in the neighborhood, along Southern Oaks
Drive.
Chairman Gray expressed concern with the carport structure, noting that he
could not support the requested variances. He asked the applicants if a carport
in the rear yard had been -considered. Mr. Castrillo, Jr. stated that there was not
room beside the house to drive their larger vehicles into the rear yard. This issue
was briefly discussed.
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.
K,