CC PACKET 11092021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

November 9, 2020 Page 3 use is often thought of as one that would be common and acceptable in the area. Variances may not be entirely economic in nature, nor be the result of the actions of the applicant. In this case, the property owner has a rear year that is approximately 40 feet wide east to west, and 50 deep north to south. The applicant is proposing a pool of 36 feet in length, and up to 22 feet in width. This would, with the removal of the shed, leave approximately 300 square feet of potential decking around the pool. There is no specific standard or requirement for pool decking, although the decking (concrete or otherwise) requires a zoning permit from the City. It would be up to the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed pool decking would not exceed the amount of impervious surface allowance for the property. For variance consideration, there is a two-step test. First is the definition of “reasonable use”. There is no specific presumption that a pool of any particular size is an integral component of residential use. The second test is whether there are unique physical conditions on the property that require consideration of a variance to reach the reasonable use as defined. The parcel itself is a typical residential parcel of common dimensions and use. For both the reasonable use and unique conditions arguments, in viewing properties along the north side of Maplewood Drive, each of the principal buildings encroach into the setbacks adjoining that road to a point equal to, or much closer than, the applicant’s property. The applicant’s proposed encroachment with the fence would be equal to the current setback of the front porch, which is approximately 22 feet from the right of way line, an encroachment of, at most, 8 feet into the required 30 foot setback. Due to the angle of the house on the lot, the fence would equal this encroachment, requiring the 8 foot variance for a 6-foot tall fence. It is noted that a 4-foot tall fence in this location would be allowed without variance. As discussed, this encroachment is essentially the same as other structures on the same frontage for 1-2 blocks in either direction, or in some cases, much less that the setbacks of the homes to the west, which appear to be less than 15 feet from the right of way. Combined with the angle of the house, the current front porch location, and the homes on adjoining lots, staff believes that the proposed 6 foot tall fence meets the tests for variance with an encroachment of up to 8 feet into the required 30 foot setback from Maplewood Drive. This finding is conditioned on the applicant’s ability to prove compliance with the impervious surface standards including existing improvements on the lot, removal of the shed, and both the proposed pool and any pool deck that is to be constructed. The applicant will need to document those square footages as a part of the pool and zoning permits required for construction. 2.Representative Codes Referenced. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 150 Zoning Code, Section 150.072, Fence Regulations. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Section §152.245 VARIANCES.