CC PACKET 05142019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

May 14, 2019 Page 5 property line. The setback for the sidewalk is not delineated on the current plan, but as it nears the rear of the porch area, it is widened to approximately 10 feet, extending to within 1.2 feet of the side property line. At this point, staff would interpret the paved space to be a “patio”, under the definition in the code, even though it includes a walkway function. At 10 feet in width, it would also accommodate the recreational uses noted in the definition. As such, it is staff’s interpretation that this area must maintain a 5 foot setback from the side property line. The purposes of the setback for such uses are many. The setback accommodates a reasonable separation of activities that may impact a neighboring property. Patios allow for sustained activity, whereas a sidewalk is utilized only intermittently, making separation more important for patio areas. The setback area accommodates the possibility of screening or buffering – including fencing and/or landscaping - that can increase privacy. The setback also helps accommodate the additional drainage and runoff that would be common with a larger paved area, a condition that would not be as significant an issue with a narrower sidewalk. As developed, the applicants have numerous alternative locations for patio space to the proposed side yard encroachment. A patio space could be developed and accessible to the steps and landing being proposed adjoining the porch toward the rear of the property, rather than the side, and easily meet or exceed the five foot setback requirement. Finally, judging by aerial photography, side-yard patio encroachments do not appear to be common in the neighborhood. It is difficult to imagine that a patio with the encroachment proposed by the applicant would be necessary to make reasonable use of the property. As such, staff does not recommend approval of the variance for a side yard setback encroachment as shown on the proposed plans. The applicant should remove this aspect of the project from the proposed construction plans for the site. The applicants note that they have not applied for a variance to this setback, maintaining instead that the space is a “decorative walkway”, not subject to the patio setback requirement. Staff noticed this variance as an aspect of the project to avoid having to return to this issue at a later date. Because the concrete encroachment is already in place, and because staff’s interpretation is that this area is required to meet a 5 foot setback, the alternative would be to initiate an enforcement action to remove the encroaching pavement. A variance request would be the remedy for the property owner. Nonetheless, staff does not recommend approval, and removal would be the result of a variance denial. An alternative option would be for the applicants to appeal the staff interpretation of this pavement. An appeal is heard by the Planning Commission, sitting as the 25