Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19960912BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER 12,1996 Rick Head called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. with Ron Erickson, Jim Iglehart, Howard DeLuca, David Schott and Dan Martineau present. Charles Paterson was excused. Minutes MOTION: Erickson moved to approve the minutes of August 8, 1996. Seconded by Head. ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION PASSED. Case #96-09 Debra & Gary Moore 233 North Spring Street Rick Head stated the applicant, Debra and Gary Moore, requested a side yard set- back variance for the construction of a 4’ x 16’x 5’6” high enclosure. Gary Moore said this would be a storage shed placed into the set-back about 3 feet to be used for mowers, gardening tools, etc. Moore noted other trash cans not enclosed are turned over from animals getting into them. He said only one neighbor was opposed to this storage enclosure. He submitted three letters from neighbors who supported it. Debra Moore stated the only home impacted was Jim Morse and he was in favor of this enclosure. She showed pictures of what would be covered up. Gary Moore said roofing was the same as the house. He commented Denise Reich sent pictures of their cars parked in the street, which was when the utilities were being redone. Moore showed a photo of Chuck Roth, City Engineer, and two Holy Cross Trucks. He further stated the other pictures of cars were the neighbors and not their cars. Debra Moore said aside from Denise Reich’s pictures and letters, they are visible to the public from the Rio Grande Trail and that the street comes to a dead end. She said they wanted to make it (yard) look clean and neat. Moore commented that some of the neighbors had trash cans in front of their houses and it was quite unsightly. She said they wanted to put the garbage cans out reach of the bears. Head asked for questions from the Board. Martineau inquired why the need for something 4’ x 16’ for garbage cans. Martineau asked why the setback was needed if the enclosure was less than 16’. Moore responded the setback was at 3’ and the enclosure at 4’ was also to be used for lawn mowers, garden tools and enough other belongings to fill it. Mr. Moore said two sheets of plywood worked out to be 16 feet. Sara Thomas, Planner, stated the house was on the property line at this point. 1 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER 12,1996 DeLuca asked the actual square footage of the house and the allowable square footage. Moore replied 4,980 was the actual and the allowable was 5,400. Head found the allowable square footage interesting because another lot was 14,000 sf and allowed 4,500 sf building under the City Code. Thomas replied the ADU and garage added bonus square footage. Thomas said the bonus of 250 sf for the ADU and 250 for the garage. She further explained the garage is calculated with the first 250 sf exempt, the next 250 sf are calculated at .5 against the FAR. Moore stated the 4,980 included decks, garage and ADU. Debra Moore showed pictures of the proposed enclosed area. DeLuca asked the reason for not putting the enclosure behind the house where it was legal. DeLuca expected the enclosure be made to look good. Moore said that side of the house was highly visible from the trail. Head stated there are letters from Howard L. Hanson, Eugene and Judith Seymore, James Morse, Ed VanDeusen and Denise Reich regarding this variance and the letters were placed into the record. DeLuca asked Thomas for staff recommendations. Thomas replied staff was comfortable granting the variance on that side of the residence because of the building envelope, stream margin review and lack of visibility from Rio Grande Trail. Thomas said that visibility was the main issue. Moore stated there was a door and a small deck off the ADU on the trail side of the house. Moore noted the setback area could barely be seen from the street, neighbors, path or anywhere. Erickson asked the applicant to express the hardship or practical difficulty. Moore responded the practicality of storage for trash. Moore said the neighborhood had trash cans everywhere. Debra Moore stated they want it to look nice and they take pride in their area. Gary Moore said they get 95% compliments on their house. Debra said Denise’s trash was moved to the park area. Erickson said the City requested that Ms. Reich move her trash cans to that area so she would have additional parking. Hoefer asked the applicant if they wished to add the pictures into the record. Moore responded yes. The photographs were added to the record. DeLuca asked Thomas what the allowance for trash enclosures was in the code. Thomas replied there was no provision in the code for setbacks. Thomas said 2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER 12,1996 dumpsters in the commercial core are in alleys, but areas without alleys are supposed to have the dumpsters enclosed by a fence. Head asked if there was a response to the Denise Reich letter. Ms. Moore stated that Ms. Reich felt resentment toward the Moores because her brother had sold the lot to them. Head commented that this board had given Moore a variance of 3 1/2 foot in the front yard to save trees. Moore said they had asked for 7 feet and were granted 3 1/2 feet. Head further stated there was discussion of what was actually built vs. what was actually approved. DeLuca said the sketch at the time of the first meeting and what was granted with the upper story on the property line was different. DeLuca said the sketch was not clarified in the minutes and when it was brought to this board the second time the wall did go straight up and the sketch showed it differently. He said the variance was granted because of this sketch. Moore explained when you go through the for permits and Design Review wanted preliminary sketches then wanted process plans. Moore said when referred back to the booklet, the board did not have anything to say. He said then they had to go through stream margin review, the conditional use review and each time they had to adjust something to make someone else happy. Moore noted their building envelope was not set until the stream margin review was done and that was one of the last approvals. He said it took 16 weeks for the and never had set the plans. Moore noted that something was wrong process with the . DeLuca said at one of the first meetings, Moore had shown an process elevation sketch. DeLuca stated in the minutes that he was willing to give a variance because only the first floor was encroaching not the second. Moore said when the variance was granted, 5 additional feet were taken off the other end. Moore said this started changing everything. DeLuca said some things (rules) have changed and the sketch/plan go into the record and if it (sketch/ plan) was not the same as the building, you will be tearing it down. Moore stated that they did save a lot of trees. Head asked if there were any more questions for the applicant. Dan Martineau stated he was in favor because reasons for the shed are laudable but, the board was only to grant a variance if there was a hardship. Martineau said that what was described was not a hardship. He was torn because he didn’t see anything wrong with what they were doing but he was “stuck in the middle”. 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER 12,1996 Jim Iglehart agreed with Dan and had hoped that during the applicant’s planning stage they would have accounted for this storage area, but that was why they were here. He said he wasn’t opposed to it and doesn’t think it offended anyone but he was “Caught between a rock and a hard spot” in trying to determine a hardship. Ron Erickson agreed that if he had built a 4900 sf house he would have built storage areas into the house. He said this house was built from scratch, and Moore had come before this board for a variance from the 4700 sf house. Erickson said he didn’t see a hardship. David Schott agreed with the rest of the Board. He said that he would love to see it but (the enclosure) was in the setback and the residence was pushed out about as far as it could go. He said that there was no hardship. Howard DeLuca said the enclosure was a great idea and hated seeing the trash cans up and down every street in the city and because of animals, trash was everywhere. DeLuca stated he had the same problem at his house with the set-back and enclosure. He noted that the Moore’s enclosure was low impact only 5 ft tall and an oversight on Moore’s part but DeLuca did not necessarily see a hardship. DeLuca said that it was too bad that zoning did not allow relief to enclose trash cans. He further noted his Homeowners Association required trash out of sight. DeLuca stated that in this commission’s rules you can not create your own hardship and that was what Moore did. DeLuca said he saw the need for this enclosure but difficult to vote for it. Rick Head said the hardship had been created by the applicant. Head noted this house had been looked at in every way possible with a three car garage but had no where to store lawn mowers. He said the shed probably would not be obtrusive but this board already gave relief once before and he can’t vote for this enclosure. Debra Moore said their trash cans would not be in their garage and it was a shame their trash cans had to be in the public eye near this newly created park. She said their trash would be right across from Denise Reich’s and the trash will be strewn all over the place from the bears. Moore stated he understood that the board had to follow the rules for hardship. DeLuca asked for the definition of a temporary structure. Thomas stated the definition of structure includes temporary or portable. She said that if they had fenced it without a roof, then it wouldn’t be an issue. 4 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER 12,1996 Definitions from code: Fence means a structure, including berms, which serves as a barrier intended to prevent escape or intrusion, to mark a boundary, to shield or screen view, or to serve any similar purpose. Fences shall be permitted in every zone district provided that no fence shall exceed six (6) feet above natural grade. Fences visible from the public right-of-way shall be constructed of wood, stone wrought iron or masonry. On corner lots, no fence, retaining wall, or similar object shall be erected or maintained which obstructs the traffic vision, nor on corner lots shall any fence, retaining wall, or similar obstruction be erected or maintained which exceeds a height of forty-two (42) inches, measured from street grade, within 30 feet from the paved or unpaved roadway. Plans showing proposed construction, material, location and height shall be presented to the building inspector before a building permit for a fence is issued. Additionally, foliage shall be placed and maintained so that it will not obstruct vehicular visibility at intersections. Structure means anything constructed, installed or portable which requires location on a parcel. It includes a movable building which can be used for housing, business, commercial, agricultural or office purposes, either temporarily or permanently. “Structure” also includes roads, walkways, paths, fences, swimming pools, tennis courts, signs, sheds, and other accessory construction. “Structures” do not include fences or walls used as fences less than six (6) feet in height, poles, lines, cables or other transmission or distribution facilities of public utilities. MOTION: Erickson mo ved to approve the request for side yard setback variance for 233 North Spring Street finding the three review standards are met. ALL OPPOSED, MOTION DENIED. Meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk CASE #96-09 DEBRA & GARY MOORE ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 5 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER 12,1996 233 NORTH SPRING STREET ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 1 6