HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8084 Staff AnalysisAUGUST 28, 2006
ITEM NO.: 2
File No.: Z-8084
Owner: Rush Evans Engineering and Construction
Applicant: Craig Evans
Address: 25 Alton Lane
Description: Lot 34, Block 23
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 new house 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: Vacant
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analvsis:
The R-2 zoned property at 25 Alton Lane is currently undeveloped and tree -
covered. The property slopes downward from front to back (west to east).
The elevation of the rear property line is approximately 10 feet below the front
property line. There is a 25 foot front platted building line along Alton Lane.
There is a also a creek which runs along the rear property line.
The applicant proposes to construct a split level single family residence on the
property, as noted on the attached site plan. There will be a two -car wide
driveway from Alton Lane at the northwest corner of the property. The
proposed residence will be located behind the 25 foot front platted building
line, with the exception of the southwest corner of the structure (porch/gazebo
AUGUST 28, 2006
ITEM
feature), which crosses the building line by approximately five (5) feet. The
southeast corner of the proposed residence will be located seven (7) feet from
the south (side) property line and 22.5 feet from the east (rear) property line.
Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned lots. Section 36-254(d)(2) requires a
minimum side setback of eight (8) feet and Section 36-254(d)(3) requires a
minimum rear setback of 25 feet. 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 construction of the new
residence with reduced front, side and rear setbacks and to cross the front
platted building line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances associated with the proposed
residence. Staff feels the request is justified based on the unusual lot
configuration (slope). The rear property line angles in to compensate for the
creek which runs along the rear of the property. Therefore, the south side
property line is approximately 44 feet shorter than the north property line.
Additionally, the south side property line angles in and is not parallel to the
north line. The front platted building line also adds to the problem based on
the fact that it angles inward at the southwest corner of the property to account
for the curvature in the right-of-way near the end of this cul-de-sac street. If all
property lines were able to be more perpendicular to the property corners, the
setback problems would not exist. Staff believes the proposed residence will
have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
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 new residence. 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 approval of the variances associated with the proposed
residence, subject to the following conditions:
1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted
building line as approved by the Board.
2. The gazebo portion of the front porch structure (southwest corner of
structure) must remain unenclosed on all sides.
2
AUGUST 28, 2006
ITEM NO.: 2
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(AUGUST 28, 2006)
The applicant was not present. There were two (2) objectors present. Staff presented
the application with a recommendation of approval.
Dennis Blevins addressed the Board in opposition. He noted that this was one of the
smallest lots in the subdivision. He explained that the applicant should consider a
smaller building size.
The issue of building setbacks was discussed. Chairman Francis explained that the
requested setback variances were very minor. Vice -Chairman Burruss discussed the
creek/open space area behind this lot. This issue was discussed briefly.
There was additional discussion of the proposed setbacks and the portions of the
proposed house which were within the setback areas. Staff noted that approximately 8
square feet of the rear corner of the house did not meet the required setbacks.
Ken Rasner also addressed the Board in opposition. He noted that the
creek/greenspace area behind the lot had been violated and explained.
There was a motion to approve the application, as recommended by staff. The motion
passed by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position. The application was approved.
W