Loading...
03 NOV 10 A G E N D A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOVEMBER 10, 2003 - 6:30 P.M. CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM 1. CALL TO ORDER: PAGES 2. APPROVAL AND/OR CORRECTION OF MINUTES: Regular Scheduled Meeting October 13, 2003 1-6 3. VARIANCE REQUEST(S): a. Accessory Building Maximum Square Footage Variance 5613 Ridge Road Petitioner: Larry Dickerson 7-8 b. Accessory Building Maximum Square Footage Variance Height and Rear Yard Setback Variance #6 Foxboro Cove Petitioner: Mark Perry 9-11 ADJOURNMENT MINUTES: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING DATE AND TIME: November 10, 2003 6:30 p.m. – 7:13 p.m. ATTENDANCE: Commissioners: Acting Chairman Keaton, Commissioners Martha Boyd, and Kevin McCleary City Representative, City Engineer Whisker _________________________________________________________________ City Clerk Susan Davitt recorded those listed above in attendance and Acting Chairman Keaton declared a quorum. APPROVAL AND/OR CORRECTION OF MINUTES: Commissioner Perry moved, second by Commissioner Boyd to approve the minutes of the Regularly Scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting of October 13, 2003. MOTION CARRIED. VARIANCE(S): a. ACCESSORY BUILDING MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE VARIANCE at 5613 Ridge Road Acting Chairman Keaton opened the public hearing at approximately 6:30 p.m. Petitioner Mr. Larry Dickerson of 1102 Steeple Chase Cove, stated that he is requesting the Board’s approval regarding an accessory building larger than the allowable square footage. He related that the accessory building a one-story building that matches the exterior of his home. He explained that when he applied for his home building permit, his plot plan included an accessory building for the main house. He added that he did not find out that he needed to obtain a square footage variance until he had started construction and the building inspector informed him that he would need to apply to the Board of Adjustment for a variance. City Engineer Whisker noted that the lots in Oak Ridge Ranch are one-acre lots and that the building does not look out of proportion to the scale of the homes being built in the subdivision. Acting Chairman Keaton closed the public hearing at approximately 6:35 p.m. Commissioner Perry moved, seconded by Commissioner Boyd to approve the square footage variance request for an accessory building at 5613 Ridge Road. MOTION CARRIED. b. ACCESSORY BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCE at #6 Foxboro Cove Acting Chairman Keaton opened the public hearing at approximately 6:36 p.m. Commissioner Perry excused himself from the Board to represent the item of business as petitioner. Petitioner Mr. Mark Perry stated that he would like to build an accessory building 12 x 23 feet and extend the height approximately 3 feet above his home’s roofline. He added that he would use the same pitch and shingles used on his home. Mr. Perry responded to a question posed by Commissioner McCleary, saying that initially he had asked for a size variance and a rear yard setback variance. He explained that he has since discovered that he is required to have an 8-foot rear yard setback because of a utility easement. He noted that he refigured the size of the building because of the easement, making it smaller. He continued, saying that he was going to make the accessory 1 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING November 10, 2003 6:30 p.m. – 7:13 p.m. building 16 x 30 feet but when he refigured it 8 feet from the property line, the building had to be resized to 12 x 23 feet to still fit on the concrete slab extending a few feet over the edge. He then explained that he is trying to create a second story playroom for his children and that in order for them to be able to stand up in the playroom he will need to have 6-foot walls to establish the same pitch of the roofline on his home. He stated that otherwise he would have construct a barn-style roof, which he did not feel would look as good as a matching pitched roof. He stated that the front of the accessory building would be brick with vinyl siding on the remainder of the building, adding that it would also have the same type architectural shingles as the home. He pointed out that the view from the street in front of the home would only show the shingles from the accessory building’s roof. Mr. John Vanderhoof of 14 Foxboro Cove related that he lives behind Mr. Perry, adding that his rear yard is adjacent to Mr. Perry’s rear yard. He related that he takes great pride in the care of his backyard and that his family spends a great deal of time in the backyard. He related that his view in his backyard now includes a neighbor on the other side who has built a two-story accessory building, which is legal because he has a two-story home. He pointed out that the two-story structure rises above the privacy fence and with Mr. Perry’s building also being constructed with the possibility of a height variance. He stated that he feels his backyard is becoming “boxed-in” with two-story buildings. He stated that as a resident living within the City limits, there are Ordinances for guidelines that should be followed. He added that while he sympathizes with Mr. Perry, he believes that Mr. Perry should abide by the rules and regulation that are in place for the City. Mr. Perry related that he is asking for the height variance so that he can match the accessory building to the aesthetics of his home. Mr. Vanderhoof reiterated the purpose of City ordinances to build appropriately to the house size, which is not exceeding the height of the home. He reasoned that he could plant trees to block the view from his backyard and added that he does not object to the construction of the accessory building as long as it falls within the guidelines set by the City. City Engineer Whisker clarified that the Code states that an accessory building cannot exceed 25 feet or the height of the principal structure whichever is less. He noted that Mr. Perry’s house is less than 25 feet in height. Mrs. Pat Vanderhoof stated that she is opposed to a two-story building, adding that she would like to see the structure observe codes and regulations. She added that she is opposed because tall structures close to the property line would make her feel enclosed. She pointed out that her backyard is surrounded by three storage buildings, which concerns her regarding property values and the presentation of intrusive structures. Mr. Tyler Tucker of 80 Foxboro Cove, related that he is Mr. Perry’s next door neighbor. He stated that the building being built by Mr. Williams 2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING November 10, 2003 6:30 p.m. – 7:13 p.m. is highly visible because of the height. He related that he is interested in the final plans being proposed by Mr. Perry, saying he is aware the plans have changed. He related that he had discussed drainage issues with Mr. Perry because of a previous drainage problem regarding water coming from the direction of Mr. Perry’s property, adding that he believes the problem has been resolved. He stated that the Vanderhoofs have completely redone the grounds around their house, noting a pool and new landscaping in their backyard. He estimated that the Vanderhoofs have put a lot of money and time into their property. He related that the property was previously rental property and was an eye sore for the neighborhood. He stated that another high-rise storage building in the neighborhood would negate aesthetic efforts by the Vanderhoofs. He related that Mr. Perry had not mentioned that the primary purpose of the building was to have a playroom for his children, adding that Mr. Perry had told him that the primary reason for was to clear out the garage and use the building as storage. He stated that he is confused regarding Mr. Perry’s intent and objects to the building being 31 feet tall. He reiterated that he objects to going above the roofline in any fashion, because he believes it will be an eye sore to the neighborhood. He related that he had first told Mr. Perry that he was not too concerned about the structure before he realized how large it was going to be. He stated that he believes that if the building is higher than the house roofline it would not is not a good idea. Mr. Perry stated that from the beginning he had told Mr. Tucker that the second story would be a playroom for his children and the bottom would be used for storage. Mr. Tucker replied that he understood the main concern initially was storage, but it seems the main concern has shifted to the height for the playroom. Mr. Perry stated that the total height of the building would be 19 feet, not 31 feet. Mr. Tucker stated that he is not sure where he got the 31-foot figure but was referring to being 3 feet over the house roofline. City Engineer Whisker related that he visited the site; adding that Mr. Perry requested specifics on shooting. He explained that when he set the level as tall as it would go on top of the existing deck it was about six feet. He added that he shot across and it was 5/10ths off the garage. He stated that from the top of the decking, they shot 6 feet to the top of the garage and then it was another 3 feet to the next roofline. He added that he is not sure if the Code is specific to the roofline, the chimney or the cap on top of the chimney. In response to a question posed by Acting Chairman Keaton, City Engineer Whisker related that the 3 feet is from the main house roofline. He then related that the Code allows a 25-foot maximum or the height of the principle structure. He added that he would need to check with City Attorney Bamburg to determine if the height of the principal structure includes a chimney. In response to a question posed by Mrs. Vanderhoof, Mr. Perry responded 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING November 10, 2003 6:30 p.m. – 7:13 p.m. that including singles the building would be a total of 19 feet in height and the top floor would be 11 feet. He explained that a barn style roof would add 9 feet to the structure for a second story, adding that he did not feel that would be as astatically pleasing. Mrs. Vanderhoof noted that a barn style roof would match the neighbors accessory building roof. In response to a question posed by Mr. Tyler, City Engineer Whisker responded that accessory buildings are allowed to have electrical, plumbing and HVACR; but would not be allowed to have a separate meter. He related that it is not uncommon for an accessory building to have those features. Mr. Perry related that after talking with his plumber he has decided not to include plumbing because the waterline is located in the front of the house. He stated that he does plan to have electricity and cable in the building. In response to a question posed by Mrs. Vanderhoof, Mr. Perry stated that he plans to have windows on the front of the building and one facing the pool, so that anyone upstairs can see the pool area. Mr. Tucker stated that the upstairs window would face his backyard, adding that he had built lattice to block views from Mr. Perry’s deck. He stated that an upstairs window facing his yard would be a privacy issue. Mr. Perry stated that he is willing to put windows only on the front of the accessory building as a compromise. Mr. Vanderhoof stated that his main concern is the height and that he did not care if the building had a flat roof or a barn roof as long as it adheres to the Code. He related that he would plant shrubbery to eliminate the view of the building from his backyard. In response to a question posed by Mrs. Vanderhoof, Mr. Perry related that the neighbors facing the front of his house would only be able to see the accessory building roofline, which would blend into his homes roofline. Mr. Vanderhoof related that Mr. Buster Smith had called him and expressed concern regarding the accessory building, adding that Mr. Smith said he was going to write a letter expressing those concerns. Mrs. Vanderhoof stated that height was her primary concern from the beginning, adding that she feels it would be invasive to them. She stated that the length of the accessory building is not huge, but that the height is the greatest concern. In response to a question posed by Commissioner McCleary, City Engineer Whisker related that Mr. Williams has a two-story house and that is why his accessory building is at 25-foot and noted that the square footage is currently under 650. In response to a question posed by Acting Chairman Keaton, Mr. Perry related 4 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING November 10, 2003 6:30 p.m. – 7:13 p.m. that his contractor had stated that instead of changing the pitch of the roof, he could create a barn style roof to have adequate space inside. In response to a question posed by Acting Chairman Keaton, Mr. Vanderhoof stated that he is interested in the least amount of height as possible while staying within the guidelines of the City regulations. He added that he is not concerned about the type of roof. He stated that his rear yard is two level, which increases visibility of the accessory buildings that are on the lots behind his house. He related that his backyard is adjacent to five other backyards most having accessory buildings. In response to a question posed by Mrs. Vanderhoof, Mr. Perry responded he could not extend the length of the building in place of height because he does not have room in his backyard. He related that there is a swing-set at that end of the rear yard. Discussed ensued regarding the location of the accessory building on the rear lot. Mr. Tyler questioned the criteria for approving this type of variance. Mr. Perry stated that one reason for approving the height variance would be the 8-foot easement requirement, which limits the area for building. He added that even so that would allow the square footage to be under 650 without using all the rear yard space regarding the small amount of grass area left. Mr. Tyler stated that he felt that the Vanderhoofs would be the ones most affected by the accessory building, adding that he did not feel that Mr. Perry is open to other options. Mr. Perry related that construction regarding the number of windows and the type of walls for the second floor has stopped pending the outcome of the meeting. Mr. Vanderhoof reiterated that he is not concerned with the type of roof that will be on the building so long as it follows the requirements of the City. Mrs. Vanderhoof stated that when Mr. Perry initially spoke to them he was unspecific about the details. She related that even at that early stage she had informed Mr. Perry of her height concerns. She stated that she tried to contact Mr. Perry immediately following but only got that answering machine. She stated that had she known Mr. Perry intended to build a two-story they would have never cut the pine tree to help screen the view. She added that she is disappointed that Mr. Perry does not seem willing to compromise, saying that a comment from Mr. Perry at the previous meeting regarding relief from the easement restriction seemed to be vindictive. Mr. Perry stated that he did not contact the utility company regarding the easement, noting that the process would take 4 – 6 months to complete. In response to a question posed by Mr. Tyler, Mr. Perry replied that if 5 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING November 10, 2003 6:30 p.m. – 7:13 p.m. he builds the building as proposed he would only have 6-foot walls for the second story. In response to a question posed by Mrs. Vanderhoof, Mr. Perry stated that he would not put on a flat roof because it would leak over time. He continued that he wants to retain the resale value of the neighborhood by putting a pitched roof on the building. Mr. Tyler repeated his earlier question, asking what the “compelling reason” for approving the variance, and what the criteria would be. City Engineer Whisker stated that the Board of Adjustment decides on a case-by-case basis, each with its own merit. He stated that if Mr. Tyler is looking for general reasons why accessory buildings are allowed extra height, width or space, there is none. In response to a question posed by Mrs. Vanderhoof, City Engineer Whisker reviewed the legal requirements by which a variance request is posted and advertised. Commissioner McCleary moved to deny the height variance request at #6 Foxboro Cove. MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Acting Chairman Keaton closed the public hearing at approximately 7:12 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: Acting Chairman Keaton adjourned the meeting at approximately 7:13 p.m. MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully, ___________________________ _____________________________ Susan L. Davitt CHAIRMAN Mark Perry CITY CLERK - TREASURER 6