HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-9084 Staff AnalysisSEPTEMBER 28, 2015
ITEM NO.: 8
File No.: Z-9084
Owner: Amanda Smith
Applicant: Susan Vaught
Address: 22 Valley Crest Court
Description: East end of Valley Crest Court
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section
36-516 to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height
allowed.
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
0
Public Works Issues:
No Comments
Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 22 Valley Crest Court is occupied by a three-story
single family residence as noted on the attached site plan. The property is located
at the east end of Valley Crest Court. The property is comprised of approximately
2.5 acres. The applicant proposes to construct an eight (8) foot high wood fence
around the majority of the perimeter of the site, as noted on the attached site plan.
An eight (8) foot high fence is being proposed based on the slope of the property.
Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence
height of six (6) feet for residential zoning. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow eight (8) foot high fencing.
Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance. Staff views the request
as reasonable. The proposed fence height will not be out of character with the
neighborhood. There are other eight (8) foot high fences throughout the
neighborhood. A variance was granted several years ago for an eight (8) foot high
fence around a portion of the perimeter of the subdivision. Staff believes the
SEPTEMBER 28, 2015
ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'T.)
proposed eight (8) foot high fence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
property or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
(September 28, 2015)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The application was approved.
2