HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgendaAGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing, presentation, discussion, consideration and possible
action, to consider a variance for 316 Pershing, Lots 19 & 20, Block 5, Oakwood Addition.
Applicant is Darrell Barrington LLC. (05 -133)
Staff Planner Molly Hitchcock presented the staff and stated that the applicant is requesting the
variances to allow the builder to continue the construction of a single family home.
When the UDO was adopted in 2003, a provision for contextual front setbacks was made to aide the
compatibility of infill development in older residential neighborhoods, it states: where an existing
block was created by an approved plat prior to July 15, 1970, a new (infill) single - family dwelling unit
shall use the adjacent lots to determine the appropriate front yard setback. The new dwelling until shall
be set no closer to the street or farther back from the street than the nearest neighboring units.
The site the applicant was using was approved in error by the City. The standard single family front
setback of 25 feet was shown on the plan, but contextual setbacks apply in this area. The subject
property was built with a front setback of 24.88 feet. The neighboring property has a front setback of
44.41 feet; thus the variance of 20 feet is requested to the front setback.
The property's survey shows the required 7.5 foot side setback to be at 7.32 feet; thus a variance of 3
inches is requested to the side setback.
The applicant states as a special condition that the setback information was not the deed, slab survey,
or building permit.
i
�— The applicant states as a hardship that the location of the house has been established.
The Board may grant lesser variances. Such an alternative will require the removal of the existing
foundation.
Mr. Simms told the Board that one individual does all the plan review for single - family building
permits. He is relatively new and he was certainly aware of the setbacks. This plan was reviewed and
approved prior to the other case the Board heard concerning the same type variance (210 Timber). It
was the slab surveyor who told the builder that he complied with the standard 25 -foot setback but not
the contextual setback. Mr. Simms told the Board that the Plans Examiner is aware of this now.
Chairman Goss opened the public hearing for those wanting to speak in favor of the request.
Darrell Barrington stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. Mr. Barrington
explained that the house will enhance the neighborhood.
Mr. Richards stated that with a home this size the parking is a concern for him.
ZBA Minutes September 6, 2005 Page 3 of 5
The following spoke in 1-, or of the request:
Charles McCandless, 310 Suffolk
} Sandy Hoekstra, 210 Lee
Bruce Hoekstra, 210 Lee
Jeanette McCandless, 310 Suffolk
Greg Normand, 315 Suffolk,
Debbie Napoli, 300 Pershing
Hugh Sterns, 316 Suffolk, stepped before the Board. Mr. Sterns was not speaking in opposition to this
variance, but to others coming in and building on the entire lot. He questioned what president is the
Board setting.
Mr. Benn asked Mr. Barrington about him continuing to construct the home when he knew there was a
problem. Mr. Barrington stated that he has already put in $350,000 in work and figured another
$30,000 would not make that big of a difference.
Patricia McDermott, 701 Dexter, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. Ms.
McDermott voiced concern how the city could have over looked something like this.
Chairman Goss closed the public hearing.
Mr. Benn made the motion to authorize the variance of 20 -feet to the front setback variance from
the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special
conditions: that the setback information was not described in the deed, slab survey or building permit
issued by the city; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in
unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: that the location of the house has been established; and
such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Sheffy
seconded the motion, which passed (5 -0).
Mr. Sheffy made the motion to authorize the variance of 3- inches to the side setback from the
terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special
conditions: due to the smallness of the variance; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of
the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: small variance and minor
correction to the house; and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial
justice done. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed (4 -1). Mr. Benn voting against
granting the variance.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Discussion of Administrative Adjustments approved by City Staff.
— None to report.
ZBA Minutes September 6, 2005 Page 4 of 5
AGENDA ITEM NO.6 Consideration and possible actit— on future agenda items — A
Zoning Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of
specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation
shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting.
There were no future items discussed.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn.
The meeting was adjourned.
J
Chairman
ZBA Minutes September 6„ 2005 Page 5 of 5