Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8073 Staff AnalysisOCTOBER 30, 2006 ITEM NO.: A File No.: Z-8073 Owner: Jimmy and Shirley Talley Applicant: Jimmy Talley Address: 17 Beauregard Drive Description: Lot 20, Hermitage Home Sites 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 a reduced front setback 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 Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 17 Beauregard Drive is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Beauregard Drive which serves as access. There is a metal carport structure which was recently constructed over a portion of the driveway. This single family lot contains a 25 foot front platted building line. The new carport structure is attached to the house and is approximately 18'-7" by 20 feet in size. The carport structure is unenclosed and painted to match the residence. The carport is located approximately 7.5 feet from the front (west) property line, extending across the front platted building line by 17.5 feet. OCTOBER 30, 2006 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T. Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires minimum front setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned lots. Section 31-12( c) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that building line encroachments be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the carport addition with a reduced front setback and to cross the front platted building line. Staff is not supportive of the requested variances. Upon surveying the neighborhood staff did find one (1) similar carport structure at 5 Beauregard Drive. However, staff noticed no other similar encroachments in this neighborhood. Therefore, staff feels that the requested carport addition with encroachment into the front setback is out of character with the neighborhood. Staff believes the carport structure has an adverse visual impact on the adjacent properties along Beaurgard Drive which have a uniform setback from the street. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted 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 Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested variances associated with the carport addition. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 31, 2006) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the August 28, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 28, 2006) Jimmy Talley was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial. Jimmy Talley addressed the Board in support of the application. He presented photos of other properties to the Board. He read his cover letter to the Board. 2 OCTOBER 30, 2006 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T. Chairman Francis noted concern that this type of carport structure tends to have an adverse visual impact on a neighborhood. Vice -Chairman Burruss discussed the width of the lot. He noted the width would allow a driveway on the north side of the house with the carport at the rear of the structure. The issue was briefly discussed. Mr. Talley explained that he could not move the carport structure to the rear of the house due to utility line locations. There was additional discussion related to other options for the location of the carport. In response to a question from the Board, Staff noted that the front property line was approximately 11 feet back from the street curb. Staff explained that the existing side setback on the north side of the house is 20 feet, and if the carport was moved to that side it would have a zero (0) setback. Mr. Talley noted that none of the neighbors opposed the carport structure. There was additional discussion of the setback issue. Chairman Francis noted that the application could be deferred if Mr. Talley needed time to explore other options. Mr. Talley noted that he would like to defer the application to the October 30, 2006 Agenda. A motion was made to defer the application to the October 30, 2006 Agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position. The application was deferred. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 30, 2006) Jimmy Talley and Floyd Moncrief were present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial. Jimmy Talley addressed the Board in support of the application. He discussed the structure's setback from the street. He asked how much of the structure would have to be removed in order for the Board to approve a front setback variance. He explained that there were power and sewer lines which prohibited the carport from being moved to the rear of the house. Floyd Moncrief, Mr. Talley's contractor, addressed the Board in support. He noted that the Bill of Assurance for the neighborhood had expired. This issue was briefly discussed. Vice -Chairman Burruss asked if screening on the north side of the structure could be done to soften the visual impact of the structure on adjacent property. This issue was discussed. 3 OCTOBER 30, 2006 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T. There was additional discussion of the front setback issue. Chairman Francis explained that he could not support the variance. Staff noted that the carport structure is out of character with the neighborhood. Mr. Talley noted that he would comply with any conditions the Board placed on the application. Mr. Moncrief asked if a petition of support from the neighborhood would help. Chairman Francis explained that it probably would not. Fletcher Hanson asked if a building permit was required and obtained for the carport construction. Staff noted that a building permit was required, but not obtained. There was additional discussion of this issue. Vice -Chairman Burruss asked if the carport structure was pre -fabricated. Mr. Moncrief explained that the structure was custom built to size and assembled on the property. Vice -Chairman Burruss explained that the issues associated with the power and sewer lines could be worked out. There was a discussion of moving the carport structure to the north side of the house with a covered walkway in front of the house. Staff noted that the minimum side setback for this lot is eight (8) feet. Mr. Moncrief expressed concern with the sewer line on the side of the house. Chairman Francis explained that if this application were denied, the applicant could file an application to move the carport to the side of the house. Mr. Moncrief asked if there would be a time limit on removing the structure if the application were denied. Staff noted that the structure would need to be removed within 30 days. There was a motion to approve the application, as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 4 nays and 1 open position. The application was denied. M