CC PACKET 10102017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

October 10, 2017 Page 2 1. Background The Applicant proposes to construct a deck from the back of the house on the property located at 3113 Edward Street NE. This is a new home, built in 2015, after the original home was torn down. According to the submitted plans, the applicant is requesting to construct a two level deck that is approximately 16’ x 18’ to lead up to a 6’ deck/stoop from the existing house. This deck design would put the outermost edge of the deck 7.5 feet from the rear property line. In the R-1 Single Family Residential district, a 25’ setback from the rear property line is required. The applicant is proposing that the required setback that a deck with only 6.5’ of depth from the home would be compliant with the zoning code, but not useable. Therefore, they need the variance to add more space to make the deck planned as proposed to be more functional. 2. Applicable Codes. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Sections §152.035 through 152.039 R-1 Single-Family District apply to this proposal. Section 150.039 (G) requires a rear yard setback of 20% of the depth of the entire lot or 25 feet. The applicant requests a variance to encroach 17.5 feet to result in a rear yard depth of 7.5 feet. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Section §152.245 VARIANCES (A) Application states that “An owner of property with an existing structure which does not comply with the zoning code, or of property on which such a structure is proposed to be constructed, may apply for a variance upon payment of the fee specified in Chapter 33”. 3. Criteria for and Consistency with Criteria for Variance Approval. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Section §152.245, (C) Evidence, lists the criteria the City Council must consider in determining whether to grant or deny a variance. The applicable criteria include: 1. The subject matter of the application is within the scope of this section. The application for a variance to the rear yard setback is eligible subject matter for variance criteria because these factors are related to dimensional and/or bulk standards. Criterion met. 2. Strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because: a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code; The property owners propose to use the property in a way that is reasonable. However, the proposed deck does not change the property owners reasonable use of their property without a deck of this construction, a patio constructed at grade does not require the variance process. Criterion not met. b. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the property owner; The plight of the property owner is due to the placement, construction proposed, and overall square footage of the proposed deck design. The lot is platted and home placement on the lot is relative to others in the general area. Criterion not met. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Granting of this variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Applicants are not proposing any new use or density, decks do exist in the neighborhood. Criterion met. d. Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties.