Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-9192 Staff AnalysisJANUARY 30, 2017 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Owner: Applicant: Address: Description: Zoned: Z-9192 Bill Greenwood Pat McGetrick 10 Bordeaux Court Lot 771, St. Charles Addition R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 and the easement provisions of Section 36-11 to allow a deck addition with reduced rear setback 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 Issues: AT&T: No objection to easement encroachment. CenterPoint Energy: No objection to encroachment. Central Arkansas Water: Approves with no comments. Entergy: No objection to easement encroachment. Little Rock Wastewater: No objection. No facilities located in rear yard area- C. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 10 Bordeaux Court is occupied by a two-story brick and frame single family residence. The property is located near the end of a cul-de-sac street. A two -car wide driveway from Bordeaux Court serves as access to the property. The property slopes downward from side to side (west to east) and front to back (south to north). The lot contains a 15 foot front platted building line, with a 7.5 foot wide utility easement along the rear (north) property line. There is also a 25 foot wide "natural buffer" which runs through the rear yard area. The property backs up to an open space tract. JANUARY 30, 2017 ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T. There are existing deck and patio structures on the rear of the residence, as noted on the attached site plan. There are two (2) existing upper deck areas, with steps down to a patio area between the decks. The decks are uncovered and unenclosed and are located seven (7) feet to 15 feet back from the rear (north) property line. The decks are located 11 feet to over 40 feet from the side property lines. The northeast corner of the deck structure encroaches into the rear utility easement by a few inches. Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet. Section 36-11(f) requires that easement encroachments be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow the existing deck structures with reduced rear setback and easement encroachment. The encroachments were recently "flagged" due to a proposal to sell the property. Staff supports the requested rear setback and easement variances. Staff views the request as reasonable. The existing deck structure has probably existed since the house was built or shortly thereafter. The lot has a relatively shallow depth ranging from 107 feet to 127 feet. The typical single family lot depth is 140 feet or greater. The property backs up to an open space tract which ranges in width of 20 feet to over 50 feet. Therefore, the lot has the appearance of having a larger rear yard area. As noted in paragraph B., all of the utility companies support the minor easement encroachment. Additionally, the St. Charles Architectural Control Committee recently visited and reviewed the property and expressed no issues with the deck structures. A letter from the St. Charles ACC is attached. Staff feels that the letter also addresses the "natural buffer" issue, as the buffer is a neighborhood issue and not a city zoning issue. Staff believes the placement of the existing deck structures will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback and easement encroachment variances, subject to the existing deck structures remaining uncovered and unenclosed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (January 30, 2017) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by the vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. K