HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff ReportSTAFF REPORT
Date: April 25, 2000 ZBA Meeting Date: May 2, 2000
APPLICANT: Boyd and Laurie Sorell
REQUEST: Variance to the front setback.
LOCATION: 7704 Sherman Court
PURPOSE: Allow for the construction of a new garage.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Status of Applicant: Property owners
Applicable
Ordinance Section: Section 7: District Use Schedule — Table A
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Zoning & Land Use: The subject property and all surrounding properties are zoned and
developed as R-1 Single Family. The property is located within
the Raintree Subdivision.
Frontage: The subject property consists of two lots, Lot 3 and Lot 4 of
Block 1. These two lots combined give the property
approximately 120' of frontage along Sherman Court.
Lot Dimensions: Due to encompassing two lots, the property has an unusual
shape. The following lot dimensions are approximate, please
refer to enclosed site plan for more detail.
P:AFITLTR\PZLTR\PROD\PZ2000\PZ02825.DOC
120' of frontage along Sherman Court
217' northwest (rear property line)
134' southwest (side property line)
132' north (side property line)
Access:
Access is given via a driveway onto Sherman Court.
Topography &
Vegetation:
Relatively flat topography, several large trees scatter the back
of the property.
Flood Plain:
Not located within a flood plain.
P:AFITLTR\PZLTR\PROD\PZ2000\PZ02825.DOC
Setback Required: A front setback of 25 feet is required for R-1 Single Family
homes.
Setback Requested: 10 feet
Case Overview: The applicants wish to renovate the existing garage into a
room and bathroom for an elderly parent. The requested
variance is to allow for the construction of a new 550 sq.ft.
(22'x 25') garage to replace the one that is to be renovated.
The applicants propose to construct the new garage in front
of the existing garage space. This location however, calls
for approximately 350 square feet (14' x 25') to extend 10
feet from the front property line. Therefore, the applicants
are requesting a I5 foot variance to the front setback.
ANALYSIS
Special Conditions: The applicants offer several special conditions:
The property has several large, mature, oak trees, which
would have to be removed if the garage was placed at a
different location.
2. A pond cuts through the property, thus limiting the
amount of space that may be added to the side of the
home.
Hardships: The applicants have identified the following hardships:
1. Cannot build behind the house due to lack of space,
utility lines and no drive access.
2. Cutting down the trees would result in more erosion
along the bank of the pond.
Alternatives: Staff has identified the following alternatives:
1. Remove the wood deck adjacent to the pond in order to
allow more buildable land for the proposed garage.
2. Place the garage on the opposite side of the house.
3. As with any case, the Board may grant less than what is
requested (0' to 15').
P:AFITLTR\PZLTR\PROD\PZ2000\PZ02825.DOC
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Ordinance Intent: Building setback requirements usually allow for some
degree of control over population density, access to light
and air, and fire protection. These standards are typically
justified on the basis of the protection of property values.
Similar Requests: The Board has approved variances to the front setback
where unique special conditions existed, including size of
lot, in older neighborhoods or in some areas to avoid the
loss of valuable trees, and where undue hardship would
result from enforcement of the ordinance. Front setback
variance requests are usually highly scrutinized by the
Board due to the visual impact to the public and
surrounding residents.
The most recent cases where a front setback variance was
sought was in the Fall of 1999. On August 3`d, the Board
granted a 4.5' front setback variance to 1002 Haley Drive in
order for the owners to construct a covered porch. This
property is located in Foxfire, where a 50' front setback is
required. On September 21st, the Board denied a request
for a 5.0' front setback variance for 516-518 Tarrow. This
variance was denied due to concerns of increased density
and a negative public hearing response.
I was unable to find a case in which the Board granted a
front setback variance of this magnitude (15 ). The largest
variance sought and granted that I found dealt with the
string of Nimitz homes that were granted 10' front setback
variances on April 1, 1997. The age and very small sizes of
the lots and the wish to revitalize the aging area were the
special conditions and hardships stated in the case.
Previous Action: This variance request was tabled at the April 4, 2000
meeting of the Board due to Board Member Happ being
called away for an emergency during the public hearing
portion of the case. The applicant requested that the
variance request be reheard during the next regularly
scheduled meeting (May 2, 2000).
Number of Property
Owners Notified: 14
P:AFITLTR\PZLTR\PROD\PZ2000\PZ02825.DOC
Responses Received: Since the April 4t' meeting, I have received two calls
regarding this case. The callers, however, did not express if
they were for or against the variance request.
ATTACHMENTS
Location Map
Application
Site Plan
Floor Plan
P:AFITLTR\PZLTR\PROD\PZ2000\PZ02825.DOC