Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7847-A Staff AnalysisSEPTEMBER 26, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Z -7847-A Owner: James Phillip Jaros Address: 5425 Centerwood Road Description: Lot 114, Prospect Terrace No. 2 Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 and the easement provisions of Section 36-11 to allow an accessory building with reduced side and rear setbacks and which encroaches into a utility easement. 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. Utility Company Issues: Little Rock Wastewater Utility: Little Rock Wastewater Utility agrees to the variance subject to the following conditions: 1. That no permanent structure (Walls etc.) be built in place of the awning. 2. That the awning is supported by 4 X 4's and not any type of extensive foundation that may interfere with the existing sewer main. 3. That in the future if the Utility is required to perform maintenance on the existing sewer main you will remove and reinstall the awning at your expense allowing the Utility to perform any necessary work within the easement. Entergy: Although we normally don't allow permanent structures within our easements, in this case we will not require removal or modification. Allowing SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T. this encroachment to remain, as currently placed and constructed, is contingent on the following conditions: 1. No additional encroachments are placed within the easement at the rear of your property. 2. The awning height is not modified such that the clearance to our conductors is reduced. 3. Entergy is not liable for any damage to the structure within the easement from falling material due to any reason including maintenance activities. Southwester Bell: No objection to encroachment. Central Arkansas Water: Central Arkansas Water has an existing 2 -inch water main within the 4 -foot wide easement on the rear of this lot. We have no objection to construction of the proposed awning in this easement; however, care must be taken to protect the existing water facilities. Central Arkansas Water assumes no liability for maintaining or replacing the installation should it be damaged or destroyed by Central Arkansas Water crews in their routine maintenance work. The applicant will be responsible for any damage to Central Arkansas Water facilities. Centerpoint Energy: No objection to encroachment. Should Centerpoint Energy ever need to access this easement, the homeowner shall be responsible for the cost of attaining access. C. Staff Anal sis: The R-2 zoned property at 5425 Centerwood Road is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Centerwood Road which serves as access. A one-story frame garage structure is located at the southeast corner of the property. The garage structure was recently moved back approximately 15 feet on an existing slab, as approved by staff. There is a four (4) foot wide utility easement along the rear (south) property line. The applicant recently constructed an awning on the rear (south side) of the garage structure. The awning is 10 feet by 18 feet, and 8 feet in height. It was constructed using three (3) 4 X 4 posts and a shed roof. The awning structure is currently unenclosed. The applicant has plans to screen in the structure. The awning structure is located one (1) foot from the side (east) property line, and extends across the rear (south) property line by 1.5 to 2.3 feet onto the property to the south. Additionally, the accessory structure, with awning, 2 SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 I I I�� ►VA I ON 101=111111115[K91010 9 occupies approximately 35 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot)., The awning structure also encroaches completely across the four (4) foot wide utility easement along the rear property line. On July 25, 2005, the Board of Adjustment denied variances associated with the awning structure. The applicant has submitted a new application, revising the awning structure. The applicant proposes to cut-off approximately 4.5 feet of the awning structure (to the edge of the existing concrete slab). The revised awning structure will be located two (2) feet back from the rear property line and extend two (2) feet into the four (4) foot wide utility easement along the rear property line. The awning structure will continue to be located one (1) foot from the side (east) property line. Additionally, the accessory structure with awning as revised, will occupy approximately 33 percent of the required rear yard. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows an accessory structure to occupy a maximum of 30 percent of the required rear yard area. Section 36-156(a)(2)f. requires minimum three (3) foot side and rear setbacks for accessory buildings. Section 36-11(f) requires that encroachments into utility easements be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance requirements to allow the revised awning structure. Staff supports the requested variances. Staff feels the revised awning structure is reasonable and alleviates concerns (water run-off, separation, fire hazard, etc.) as raised by staff and the neighbors with the previous proposal. Staff feels that guttering should be placed on the awning structure to eliminate any possible water run-off issues. Staff believes the overall size of the accessory structure (with awning) is compatible with the neighborhood, as there are many other larger accessory structures in the area. With compliance with the conditions noted in the next paragraph (Staff Recommendation), staff believes the awning structure will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variances associated with the revised awning structure, subject to the following conditions: 1. The awning structure must be cut back to at least two (2) feet inside the rear (south) property line. 2. The awning structure must remain unenclosed on the south, east and west sides. 3. Compliance with the utility comments as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. 3 SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T. 4. Guttering must be placed on the structure to prohibit any water run-off onto the property to the south. 5. A building permit must be obtained. 6. The awning structure must be modified with guttering within 14 days. 7. Any improvements (brick pavers, block walls, foundation elements, etc.) which cross the rear (south) property line must be removed within 14 days. 8. The awning must be painted to match the principal structure within 30 days. 9. The applicant must have a surveyor clearly mark the rear property line prior to revising the awning structure. 10. If the above revisions (Item 6,7 and 8) are not made within the time specified, a court citation will be issued by the City's Zoning Enforcement Staff. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (SEPTEMBER 26, 2005) Phillip Jaros was present, representing the application. There were three (3) persons present with concerns. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval with conditions. Phillip Jaors addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained the proposed revision to the awning. He noted no problem with the conditions as recommended by staff. Ellen Gray addressed the Board with concerns. She noted that she represented the surrounding neighbors. She stated that she was supportive of the conditions as recommended by staff, as long as the City monitored the revisions. Mr. Jaros explained that he met with or attempted to meet with all of the abutting neighbors. Fletcher Hanson noted that staff condition number 9 should state that the rear property line should be clearly marked until after inspections were made by the City. There was a motion to approve the application, as recommended by staff, with the revision to condition 9 as noted above. The motion was passed by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. The application was approved. El SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Z -7847-A Owner: James Phillip Jaros Address: 5425 Centerwood Road Description: Lot 114, Prospect Terrace No. 2 Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 and the easement provisions of Section 36-11 to allow an accessory building with reduced side and rear setbacks and which encroaches into a utility easement. 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. Utility, Company Issues: Little Rock Wastewater Utility: Little Rock Wastewater Utility agrees to the variance subject to the following conditions: 1. That no permanent structure (Walls etc.) be built in place of the awning. 2. That the awning is supported by 4 X 4's and not any type of extensive foundation that may interfere with the existing sewer main. 3. That in the future if the Utility is required to perform maintenance on the existing sewer main you will remove and reinstall the awning at your expense allowing the Utility to perform any necessary work within the easement. Entergy: Although we normally don't allow permanent structures within our easements, in this case we will not require removal or modification. Allowing SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 f CON'T_ this encroachment to remain, as currently placed and constructed, is contingent on the following conditions: 1. No additional encroachments are placed within the easement at the rear of your property. 2. The awning height is not modified such that the clearance to our conductors is reduced. 3. Entergy is not liable for any damage to the structure within the easement from falling material due to any reason including maintenance activities. Southwester Bell: No objection to encroachment Central Arkansas Water: Central Arkansas Water has an existing 2 -inch water main within the 4 -foot wide easement on the rear of this lot. We have no objection to construction of the proposed awning in this easement; however, care must be taken to protect the existing water facilities. Central Arkansas Water assumes no liability for maintaining or replacing the installation should it be damaged or destroyed by Central Arkansas Water crews in their routine maintenance work. The applicant will be responsible for any damage to Central Arkansas Water facilities. Centerpoint Energy: No objection to encroachment. Should Centerpoint Energy ever need to access this easement, the homeowner shall be responsible for the cost of attaining access. C. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 5425 Centerwood Road is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Centerwood Road which serves as access. A one-story frame garage structure is located at the southeast corner of the property. The garage structure was recently moved back approximately 15 feet on an existing slab, as approved by staff. There is a four (4) foot wide utility easement along the rear (south) property line. The applicant recently constructed an awning on the rear (south side) of the garage structure. The awning is 10 feet by 18 feet, and 8 feet in height. It was constructed using three (3) 4 X 4 posts and a shed roof. The awning structure is currently unenclosed. The applicant has plans to screen in the structure. The awning structure is located one (1) foot from the side (east) property line, and extends across the rear (south) property line by 1.5 to 2.3 feet onto the property to the south. Additionally, the accessory structure, with awning, 2 SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T, occupies approximately 35 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot)., The awning structure also encroaches completely across the four (4) foot wide utility easement along the rear property line. On July 25, 2005, the Board of Adjustment denied variances associated with the awning structure. The applicant has submitted a new application, revising the awning structure. The applicant proposes to cut-off approximately 4.5 feet of the awning structure (to the edge of the existing concrete slab). The revised awning structure will be located two (2) feet back from the rear property line and extend two (2) feet into the four (4) foot wide utility easement along the rear property line. The awning structure will continue to be located one (1) foot from the side (east) property line. Additionally, the accessory structure with awning as revised, will occupy approximately 33 percent of the required rear yard. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows an accessory structure to occupy a maximum of 30 percent of the required rear yard area. Section 36-156(a)(2)f. requires minimum three (3) foot side and rear setbacks for accessory buildings. Section 36-11(f) requires that encroachments into utility easements be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance requirements to allow the revised awning structure. Staff supports the requested variances. Staff feels the revised awning structure is reasonable and alleviates concerns (water run-off, separation, fire hazard, etc.) as raised by staff and the neighbors with the previous proposal. Staff feels that guttering should be placed on the awning structure to eliminate any possible water run-off issues. Staff believes the overall size of the accessory structure (with awning) is compatible with the neighborhood, as there are many other larger accessory structures in the area. With compliance with the conditions noted in the next paragraph (Staff Recommendation), staff believes the awning structure will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variances associated with the revised awning structure, subject to the following conditions: 1. The awning structure must be cut back to at least two (2) feet inside the rear (south) property line. 2. The awning structure must remain unenclosed on the south, east and west sides. 3. Compliance with the utility comments as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. 3 SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) 4. Guttering must be placed on the structure to prohibit any water run-off onto the property to the south. 5. A building permit must be obtained. 6. The awning structure must be modified with guttering within 14 days. 7. Any improvements (brick pavers, block walls, foundation elements, etc.) which cross the rear (south) property line must be removed within 14 days. 8. The awning must be painted to match the principal structure within 30 days. 9. The applicant must have a surveyor clearly mark the rear property line prior to revising the awning structure. 10. If the above revisions (Item 6,7 and 8) are not made within the time specified, a court citation will be issued by the City's Zoning Enforcement Staff. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (SEPTEMBER 26, 2005) Phillip Jaros was present, representing the application. There were three (3) persons present with concerns. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval with conditions. Phillip Jaors addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained the proposed revision to the awning. He noted no problem with the conditions as recommended by staff. Ellen Gray addressed the Board with concerns. She noted that she represented the surrounding neighbors. She stated that she was supportive of the conditions as recommended by staff, as long as the City monitored the revisions. Mr. Jaros explained that he met with or attempted to meet with all of the abutting neighbors. Fletcher Hanson noted that staff condition number 9 should state that the rear property line should be clearly marked until after inspections were made by the City. There was a motion to approve the application, as recommended by staff, with the revision to condition 9 as noted above. The motion was passed by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. The application was approved. .19 JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B File No.: Z-7847 Owner/Applicant: James Phillip Jaros Address: 5425 Centerwood Road Description: Lot 114, Prospect Terrace No. 2 Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the easement provisions of Section 36-11 and the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow an accessory structure with reduced setbacks and which encroaches into a utility easement. 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 Work Issues: No Comments. B. Utility Company Issues: Little Rock Wastewater Utility: Little Rock Wastewater Utility agrees to the variance subject to the following conditions: 1. That no permanent structure (Walls etc.) be built in place of the awning. 2. That the awning is supported by 4 X 4's and not any type of extensive foundation that may interfere with the existing sewer main. 3. That in the future if the Utility is required to perform maintenance on the existing sewer main you will remove and reinstall the awning at your expense allowing the Utility to perform any necessary work within the easement. JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B CON'T. Entergy: Although we normally don't allow permanent structures within our easements, in this case we will not require removal or modification. Allowing this encroachment to remain, as currently placed and constructed, is contingent on the following conditions: 1. Np additional encroachments are placed within the easement at the rear of your property. 2. The awning height is not modified such that the clearance to our conductors is reduced. 3. Entergy is not liable for any damage to the structure within the easement from falling material due to any reason including maintenance activities. Southwestern Bell: No objection to encroachment. Central Arkansas Water: No Comments received. Centerpoint Energy: No Comments received. C. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 5425 Centerwood Read is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Centerwood Road which serves as access. A one-story frame garage structure is located at the southeast corner of the property. The garage structure was recently moved back approximately 15 feet on an existing slab, as approved by staff. There is a four (4) foot wide utility easement along the rear (south) property line. The applicant recently constructed an awning on the rear (south side) of the garage structure, as noted on the attached site plan. The awning is 7 feet by 18 feet, and 8 feet in height. It was constructed using three (3) 4 X 4 posts and a shed roof. The awning structure is currently unenclosed. The applicant has plans to screen in the structure. The awning structure is located one (1) foot from the side (east) and rear (south) property lines. Additionally, the accessory structure, with awning, occupies approximately 35 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot). The awning structure also encroaches into the four (4) foot wide utility easement by approximately three (3) feet. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows an accessory structure to occupy a maximum of 30 percent of the required rear yard area. Section 36-156(a)(2)f. requires minimum three (3) foot side and rear setbacks for accessory buildings. Section 36-11(f) requires that encroachments into utility easements be reviewed and 2 JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B(CON'T.) approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance requirements to allow the awning structure. Staff does not support the requested variances. Although the size of the entire accessory structure is not out of character with the neighborhood, staff has concerns with the structure occupying almost the entire width of the utility easement and with the reduced setbacks. Water run-off associated with the shed roof could adversely affect the adjacent property. Staff feels that the awning structure as proposed is inappropriate for the property. Staff suggests moving the awning structure to the west side of the garage structure. This would eliminate the need for any variances. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested setback and easement encroachment variances. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MAY 23, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the June 27, 2005 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the June 27, 2005 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JUNE 27, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the July 25, 2005 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the July 25, 2005 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 25, 2005) James Phillip Jaros was present, representing the application. There were several persons present in opposition. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B (CON'T James Phillip Jaros addressed the Board in support of the application. He presented photos of the awning structure to the Board. He explained that he did not realize he needed a variance when he constructed the awning structure. He explained the drainage issues associated with the property. He described the area of the utility easement. He stated that he would cut off the overhang on the awning structure and install a gutter on its south side. There was a brief discussion of the foundation under the awning structure. Mr. Jaros explained that there was an existing slab under the structure. The comments received from utility companies were briefly discussed. Vice -Chairman Burruss asked about reducing the size of the awning structure to the existing slab. This issue was briefly discussed. Trudie Cromwell, of the Heights Neighborhood Association, addressed the Board in opposition. She expressed concerns with drainage, the structure being located within an easement and the close proximity of the awning structure to the adjacent accessory building to the south. She noted that several property owners in the area were against the application. Greg Lathrop, owner of the property immediately to the west, also addressed the Board in opposition. He expressed concerns with drainage in the easement area, water run-off and the possible fire hazard created by the structure. He stated that the neighbors were not aware of the awning construction. Stacy Hurst also addressed the Board in opposition. She explained that the neighborhood was typically not opposed to variances, but there was concerns with this particular request. She urged Mr. Jaros to work with the neighborhood on a possible compromise. Mr. Jaros explained that he talked to the neighbors to the east and south prior to construction of the awning structure. He noted that none of the neighbors had expressed any concerns to him. Mr. Lathrop described the properties to the south. He discussed the issue of fencing between the adjacent properties. Ellen Gray, property owner to the south, addressed the Board in opposition. She discussed the issue of fencing between the two (2) properties. Vice -Chairman Burruss noted that he could possibly support the awning structure being located only over the existing concrete slab. There was a brief discussion of the setback of the slab from the rear property line. Staff noted that the slab was located no more than two (2) feet from the rear property line. C! JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B CONT. Chairman Francis expressed concerns with the close proximity of the awning structure to the adjacent accessory structure to the south, and the location of the structure within the easement. Mr. Jaros amended the application to move the awning structure back to the existing concrete slab with an eight (8) inch overhang. Chris Wilbourn expressed concerns with the structures close proximity to existing power lines and explained. There was a brief discussion of the location of the structure with relation to the rear property line. There was a motion to approve the revised application. The motion was briefly discussed. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 4 nays and 1 open position. The revised application was denied. There was a brief discussion of allowing the applicant time to remove the awning structure. The Board informed staff and Mr. Jaros that the awning structure would need to be removed by the August 26, 2005 filing deadline, unless a new, significantly different, application was filed. JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B File No.: Z-7847 Owner/Applicant: James Phillip Jaros Address: 5425 Centerwood Road Description: Lot 114, Prospect Terrace No. 2 Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the easement provisions of Section 36-11 and the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow an accessory structure with reduced setbacks and which encroaches into a utility easement. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: :49 A. Public Work Issues: No Comments. B. Utility Company Issues: Single Family Residential Little Rock Wastewater Utility: Little Rock Wastewater Utility agrees to the variance subject to the following conditions: 1. That no permanent structure (Walls etc.) be built in place of the awning. 2. That the awning is supported by 4 X 4's and not any type of extensive foundation that may interfere with the existing sewer main. 3. That in the future if the Utility is required to perform maintenance on the existing sewer main you will remove and reinstall the awning at your expense allowing the Utility to perform any necessary work within the easement. JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B (CON'T. Entergy: Although we normally don't allow permanent structures within our easements, in this case we will not require removal or modification. Allowing this encroachment to remain, as currently placed and constructed, is contingent on the following conditions: 1. NQ additional encroachments are placed within the easement at the rear of your property. 2. The awning height is not modified such that the clearance to our conductors is reduced. 3. Entergy is not liable for any damage to the structure within the easement from falling material due to any reason including maintenance activities. Southwestern Bell: No objection to encroachment. Central Arkansas Water: No Comments received. Centerpoint Energy: No Comments received. C. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 5425 Centerwood Road is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Centerwood Road which serves as access. A one-story frame garage structure is located at the southeast corner of the property. The garage structure was recently moved back approximately 15 feet on an existing slab, as approved by staff. There is a four (4) foot wide utility easement along the rear (south) property line. The applicant recently constructed an awning on the rear (south side) of the garage structure, as noted on the attached site plan. The awning is 7 feet by 18 feet, and 8 feet in height. It was constructed using three (3) 4 X 4 posts and a shed roof. The awning structure is currently unenclosed. The applicant has plans to screen in the structure. The awning structure is located one (1) foot from the side (east) and rear (south) property lines. Additionally, the accessory structure, with awning, occupies approximately 35 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot). The awning structure also encroaches into the four (4) foot wide utility easement by approximately three (3) feet. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows an accessory structure to occupy a maximum of 30 percent of the required rear yard area. Section 36-156(a)(2)f. requires minimum three (3) foot side and rear setbacks for accessory buildings. Section 36-11(f) requires that encroachments into utility easements be reviewed and 2 JULY 25, 2005 approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance requirements to allow the awning structure. Staff does not support the requested variances. Although the size of the entire accessory structure is not out of character with the neighborhood, staff has concerns with the structure occupying almost the entire width of the utility easement and with the reduced setbacks. Water run-off associated with the shed roof could adversely affect the adjacent property. Staff feels that the awning structure as proposed is inappropriate for the property. Staff suggests moving the awning structure to the west side of the garage structure. This would eliminate the need for any variances. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested setback and easement encroachment variances. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MAY 23, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the June 27, 2005 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the June 27, 2005 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JUNE 27, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the July 25, 2005 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the July 25, 2005 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 25, 2005) James Phillip Jaros was present, representing the application. There were several persons present in opposition. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. 3 JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B (CON'T James Phillip Jaros addressed the Board in support of the application. He presented photos of the awning structure to the Board. He explained that he did not realize he needed a variance when he constructed the awning structure. He explained the drainage issues associated with the property. He described the area of the utility easement. He stated that he would cut off the overhang on the awning structure and install a gutter on its south side. There was a brief discussion of the foundation under the awning structure. Mr. Jaros explained that there was an existing slab under the structure. The comments received from utility companies were briefly discussed. Vice -Chairman Burruss asked about reducing the size of the awning structure to the existing slab. This issue was briefly discussed. Trudie Cromwell, of the Heights Neighborhood Association, addressed the Board in opposition. She expressed concerns with drainage, the structure being located within an easement and the close proximity of the awning structure to the adjacent accessory building to the south. She noted that several property owners in the area were against the application. Greg Lathrop, owner of the property immediately to the west, also addressed the Board in opposition. He expressed concerns with drainage in the easement area, water run-off and the possible fire hazard created by the structure. He stated that the neighbors were not aware of the awning construction. Stacy Hurst also addressed the Board in opposition. She explained that the neighborhood was typically not opposed to variances, but there was concerns with this particular request. She urged Mr. Jaros to work with the neighborhood on a possible compromise. Mr. Jaros explained that he talked to the neighbors to the east and south prior to construction of the awning structure. He noted that none of the neighbors had expressed any concerns to him. Mr. Lathrop described the properties to the south. He discussed the issue of fencing between the adjacent properties. Ellen Gray, property owner to the south, addressed the Board in opposition. She discussed the issue of fencing between the two (2) properties. Vice -Chairman Burruss noted that he could possibly support the awning structure being located only over the existing concrete slab. There was a brief discussion of the setback of the slab from the rear property line. Staff noted that the slab was located no more than two (2) feet from the rear property line. .19 JULY 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: B (CON'T.) Chairman Francis expressed concerns with the close proximity of the awning structure to the adjacent accessory structure to the south, and the location of the structure within the easement. Mr. Jaros amended the application to move the awning structure back to the existing concrete slab with an eight (8) inch overhang. Chris Wilbourn expressed concerns with the structures close proximity to existing power lines and explained. There was a brief discussion of the location of the structure with relation to the rear property line. There was a motion to approve the revised application. The motion was briefly discussed. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 4 nays and 1 open position. The revised application was denied. There was a brief discussion of allowing the applicant time to remove the awning structure. The Board informed staff and Mr. Jaros that the awning structure would need to be removed by the August 26, 2005 filing deadline, unless a new, significantly different, application was filed.