|
Case Number: |
A-16-185 |
|
Applicant: |
Lucille Forcum |
|
Owner: |
Lucille Forcum |
|
Council District: |
6 |
|
Location: |
2730 Johnson Grass |
|
Legal Description: |
Lot 5, Block 40, NCB 18820 |
|
Zoning: |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
|
Case Manager: |
Shepard Beamon, Senior Planner |
Request
A request for a 20 foot variance from the platted 20 foot front setback, as described in Section 35-516 (o), to allow a carport to be on the front property line.
Executive Summary
The subject property is located in the Timber Ridge, Unit 15 Subdivision, recorded August 24, 1983, and includes a 20 foot platted front setback. Recently, the applicant constructed a wooden carport that is on the front property line. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the carport to remain as constructed on the front property line. The carport does not encroach into the side setback, so trespass and water runoff are not a concern. The applicant constructed the carports to protect their new vehicles from inclement weather.
Subject Property Zoning/Land Use
|
Existing Zoning |
Existing Use |
|
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Residential |
Surrounding Zoning/Land Use
|
Orientation |
Existing Zoning District(s) |
Existing Use |
|
North |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Residential |
|
South |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Residential |
|
East |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Residential |
|
West |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Residential |
Comprehensive Plan Consistency/Neighborhood Association
The property is located within the boundaries of the West/ Southwest Sector Plan and has a future land use designation of Suburban Tier. The subject property is not located within the boundaries of a registered neighborhood association.
Criteria for Review
According to Section 35-482(e) of the UDC, in order for a variance to be granted, the applicant must demonstrate all of the following:
1. The variance is not contrary to the public interest.
The public interest is defined as the general health, safety, and welfare of the public. In this case, the public interest is represented by the front setback to ensure the safety for adjacent property owners and visibility clearance for motorists. The carport does not interfere with Clear Vision; however, it does disrupt uniformity and overall appearance within the neighborhood as there are very few carports in the community.
2. Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship.
There are no special conditions on this lot that make enforcement of the ordinance an unnecessary hardship. The home includes an attached two car garage.
3. By granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed and substantial justice will be done.
The intent of a front setback is to create an open street view and establish uniform development standards. The carport does conflict with the intent of the front setback as it does not adhere to the open street view.
4. The variance will not authorize the operation of a use other than those uses specifically authorized for the district in which the property for which the variance is sought is located.
The requested variance will not authorize the operation of a use on the subject property other than those specifically permitted in the “R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District.
5. Such variance will not substantially injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property or alter the essential character of the district in which the property is located.
The subject property is located within the subdivision where all of the homes were built at least 20 feet from the front property line. During field visits, staff observed the subject carport as the only carport along the street that is located directly on the front property line.
6. The plight of the owner of the property for which the variance is sought is due to unique circumstances existing on the property, and the unique circumstances were not created by the owner of the property and are not merely financial, and are not due to or the result of general conditions in the district in which the property is located.
There are no unique circumstances related to this property. The owner constructed the carport without knowledge of the permitting process. This does not justify as a unique circumstance or property related hardship.
Alternative to Applicant’s Request
The applicant could remove the carport.
The applicant could amend the recorded plat.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends DENIAL of the request in A-16-185 based on the following findings of fact:
|
1. |
There is no property-related hardship that creates a unique situation warranting the variance; |
|
2. |
Carports are not common within the neighborhood. |