HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesZBA MINUTES
April 4, 2000
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a rear setback variance at 3500 Regal
Row, lot 1, block 2, Williams Court Subdivision. Applicant is Greg & Noel Salata.
Staff Planner Hitchcock stepped before the Board and presented the staff report. Ms.
Hitchcock told the Board that the applicants are requesting a setback variance to allow
the construction of a new family room. In conjunction with a home remodeling project,
the applicants wish to add an approximately 315 feet family room to the rear of their
house and extend the roof line to cover an adjacent, existing patio area. The proposed
room addition would conform to the side setback, but would be located 18 feet from the
rear property line. Thus, the applicants are requesting a variance of 7 feet to the rear
setback to allow for the addition to the house.
The applicants state a special condition is the shape and design of the house, which would
render the rear of the property the only place suitable for a home addition. The applicants
argue an addition to the house anywhere else on the subject property would disrupt the
visual integrity of the neighborhood.
The applicants offer a hardship that by meeting the provisions of the ordinance, the visual
aesthetics of their neighborhood would not be preserved.
Ms. Hitchcock ended her staff report by telling the Board that two phones calls where
received concerning this case and neither one express support or opposition.
With no questions from the Board Members, Chairman Alexander opened the public
hearing.
Greg Salata, applicant/homeowner, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by
Chairman Alexander. Mr. Salata presented the Board pictures of the property and
explained the need for the addition to be added to the rear of the home instead of the
front. Mr. Salata explained that with the layout of the home now, if a square room were
placed at the rear it would be very easy to extend the roofline down to the new room and
also cover the patio in one construction project. This would also make a clean roofline.
Mr. Salata stated that the only other option would be to put the room at the front left
corner of the property and the problem would then be the house would have an odd U
shape. Mr. Salata stated that it then would not conform to the rest of the neighborhood.
Mr. Slata ended by telling the Board about two large oak trees that would have to be
removed. In the backyard there is one tree that sets on the setback line and that tree
would be moved to the other side of the backyard.
Noel Salata, applicant/homeowner, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by
Chairman Alexander. Mrs. Salata told the Board that they thought of various ways of
adding the room and the plan presented was the best for them as well as the
neighborhood. Mrs. Salata ended by telling the Board that they spoke with the area
neighbors and no one was in opposition
With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or opposition to the request,
Chairman Alexander closed the public hearing.
Mr. Happ made the motion to deny a variance to the minimum setback from the terms
of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest due to the lack of any
special conditions, and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance
would not result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of this
ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Ms. Ellis seconded the
motion.
Chairman Alexander asked the applicants if there was any special need for the room
addition. Mr. Salata replied that they plan on staying in this area and with two children
the addition would allow each child a room of their own.
Board vote (4-1) to deny. Mr. Murphy voting for granting the variance.