Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMatchless_COA_Powerpoint_9-5-19Minimum Setback Variances Properties located at 1040 and 1050 Matchless Drive Lots 2 and 3 of the Alpine Acres Subdivision Board of Adjustment September 5th, 2019 Applicant: Racquet Club Condominium Association Representative: Bryan May, Bryan May Architecture Request of Board of Adjustment: Variances to Minimum Setback Requirements R-6 Zone District requirements for Accessory Structures: •15 foot front yard setback •Minimum of 15 foot side yard with a total of 50 feet on both sides •5’ foot rear yard setbacks Background •2000 BOA variance granted for garages •Staff recommended denial and BOA found a hardship on the property Variance Requests: Construction of 2- 2 car garages, trash/recycling building, and retaining walls 1040 Matchless Drive: Front Yard Setback Variance: 5’ setback for construction of a 2 car garage and 0’ setback for a retaining wall. Side Yard Setback Variance: 6” setback for construction of a 2 car garage and retaining wall. 1050 Matchless Drive: Front Yard Setback Variance: 0’ setback for a retaining wall. Side Yard Setback Variance: 6” setback for construction of a 2 car garage, trash/recycling area, and retaining wall. Rear Yard Setback Variance: 0’ setback for construction of a retaining wall. View from Matchless Drive - existing View from Matchless Drive – proposed 7-E Standards applicable to variances (26.314.040) 1) …generally consistent with purposes, goals, objectives and standards… 2) …minimum variance…reasonable use of parcel, building, or structure 3) Literal interpretation…would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed… In determining whether an applicant’s rights would be deprived… a) special conditions and circumstances which are unique to the parcel, building or structure… or b) Granting the variance will not confer…any special privilege denied…to other parcels, buildings or structures in the same zone district Staff does not support the proposed variance for the following reasons: 1.Causing an Applicant an “unnecessary hardship v. mere inconvenience” •Development rights (duplexes) are currently being exercised and are the principal use of land. •Garages, though a permitted use, are accessory structures and do not carry the status of a fundamental development right. •Requiring accessory structure setback compliance does not deprive fundamental development rights and represents a matter of inconvenience. 2.Special circumstances not resulting from actions by the Applicant •Existing development pushes garage development to the north and within setbacks. •This circumstance cannot be considered Alternatively, should the BOA find a hardship exists on the property •Staff has drafted a resolution of approval, with conditions. •Construction, maintenance of the buildings, and drainage, a minimum of 1’ setback from neighboring property boundaries. Questions for Staff?