Loading...
08 OCT 13 A G E N D A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 13, 2008 6:30 P.M. CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM 1. CALL TO ORDER: PAGES 2. APPROVAL AND/OR CORRECTION OF MINUTES: Regular Scheduled Meeting August 11, 2008 1-2 3. VARIANCE REQUEST(S): Front and rear setback variances Faith Subdivision/North First Street Petitioner: Rory Smith Representative: Bond Engineering 3 (plat included in packet) ADJOURNMENT MINUTES: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING DATE AND TIME: October 13, 2008 6:30 p.m. – 7:03 p.m. ATTENDANCE: Commissioners: Bart Gray, Jr., Mark Perry, Chairman Chad Young, and City Planner McCulley were present _________________________________________________________________ Deputy City Clerk Lynette Culpepper recorded those listed above in attendance and Chairman Young declared a quorum. APPROVAL AND/OR CORRECTION OF MINUTES: Commissioner Perry moved, seconded by Commissioner Gray to approve the minutes of the regularly scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting of August 11, 2008. MOTION CARRIED with Chairman Young voting AYE. VARIANCE(S): Front and rear yard setback variances for Faith Subdivision/North First Street Chairman Young opened the public hearing at approximately 6:31 p.m. Mr. Aaron Robinson presented the preliminary plat and site plan, noting that the property had recently been rezoned. He explained that the plat shows a 25’ rear yard setback adjacent to Woolfort Street. He then stated that they are requesting a variance regarding the 25’ front yard setbacks to 15’ and a variance for the rear yard setback adjacent to church property from 25’ to 18’. He noted that the rear yard on the north side of the development is adjacent to the Church parking lot, presenting less of a privacy issue. He then answered that the owner is proposing to build a column type privacy fence to keep the property more restrictive. He then noted that the property owner has entertained the ideal of putting in a gate to limit access. He pointed out a 10’ access easement to the rear of the property regarding fire department equipment access to the development, adding that the developer is proposing to gravel and then sod the easement. Discussion ensued regarding perimeter fencing of the development and it was determined that would be a discussion for the Planning Commission. Mr. Robinson stated that he did not feel the developer would be opposed to fencing the east 200’ of property line. City Planner McCulley noted discussions to keep the street private because the development is in a one multi-family lot, explaining that if the street were to remain private and undedicated it would remove setback considerations. Mr. Robinson stated that the developer would prefer that the street be dedicated to the City for maintenance, adding that one reason for that is because the street lots would be accessed from the rear off the street within the development. Chairman Young reiterated that if the drive remains private then the setbacks are a mute issue. City Planner McCulley then clarified that the rear yard setbacks would still be an issue, noting separation issues from the development. He related that it could still be requested if right-of-way were dedicated to the City. He added that it is good for it to be part of the record that the developer did request setback variances. He stated that right-of-way dedication could 1 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING October 13, 2008 be discussed in Planning Commission. He then answered that he would prefer the developer obtain a variance and then discuss issues regarding the right-of-way with the Planning Commission. He stated that the Fire Marshall has reviewed the plat and does not have a problem with the setbacks as requested. Chairman Young voiced concerns regarding the probability of visitors having to park in the street because of the limited driveway length. Mr. Robinson related that the street is 27’ curb and gutter, adding that the street meets all City standards with a 48.5’ cul-de-sac for fire equipment. City Planner McCulley related that a normal parking space is 18’ and that a normal car length is 16’. Commissioner Gray noted that with the 15’ setback and the required 11.5’ there is approximately 26.5’, noting that parking at least 2’ away from the building would leave a 24.5’ pad before the curb. Mr. Robinson related that in discussion with the Planning Commission, the driveways were widened to allow for two car side-by-side parking. He then answered that the units are planned to be two bedrooms. He stated that the driveway would be 21’. Commissioner Gray suggested that it might be better to decrease the rear setback by 2 or 3 feet and increase the front setback. Mr. Robinson answered that currently they are asking for an 18’ rear yard setback, with allowance of a 7’ variance. Discussion ensued regarding changing the front and rear yard setbacks. It was noted that as a private development with a private street there would not be a sidewalk requirement. Mr. Robinson noted that 25’ of right-of-way has been dedicated for the development of Woolfort Street, should the City decide to make improvements. Chairman Young stated that his recommendation would be to decrease both sides of the street’s rear yards to increase the front setbacks. Mr. Robinson stated that he did not feel that would be a problem for the developer, saying that their concern was in asking for more of a variance than the Board would be willing to consider. Commissioner Gray moved to approve a 10’ rear yard setback regarding the rear yards adjacent to the Church parking lot and to set at minimum a 20’ front yard setback for the corresponding front yards. Discussion ensued and Mr. Emerson Smith, a resident of the Pine Meadows Mobile Home Park, stated that there is no parking for non-residents of the complex. He then added that it is not clear to him if the developer will commit to a fence. He stated that his fear would be if there is not a fence on the south side then visitors may use Woolfort for parking to access units 2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING October 13, 2008 from the rear. He stated that if the rear yard setback were decrease as discussed it would be more probable that visitors would access the development from Woolfort. He reiterated that his concern would be visitor parking, adding that he does not believe there would be room to park on the street. Mr. Robinson reiterated that the street does meet all City codes for street development. He stated that a hypothetical situation would be hard to control, adding that parking on a City street is illegal and the person could receive a ticket. Commissioner Gray noted that the Planning Commission would be the proper body to address issues such as fencing, adding that Mr. Robinson had already expressed that the developer is proposing to construct a fence along Woolfort Street. Mr. Robinson agreed that the developer is definitely proposing to build a fence on Woolfort in order to separate the development from other development on the south. City Planner McCulley stated that as a multi-planned development it would require approval of a site plan and that would be the appropriate time to discuss screening. He stated that the development would have to comply not only with multi-family development standards; it would have to comply with the landscaping requirements. Discussion ensued regarding the scope of authority granted to the Board to change the quantity of a request. It was the consensus of the Board that they are within their scope to alter the number of feet considered for variance. Chairman Young noted that if the 25’ front yard setback is adhered to then the rear yard setback variance could be changed to 11.5’ rear yards on each side of the street. In response to a question from Mr. Emerson Smith, Chairman Young clarified that the Board is trying to mitigate the worst condition, whether it’s the parking situation or having smaller rear yard setbacks. Mr. Robinson offered that he and his client do not have a problem with the Board changing the setback request to gain 25’ in the front yard setback. Chairman Young entertained a motion to amend the setback request and allow City Attorney Bamburg an opportunity to rectify that if deemed outside the scope of the Board’s authority. Commissioner Gray moved seconded by Commissioner Perry to grant a minimum rear yard setback of 10’ in order to satisfy the required 25’ front yard setback code requirement, contingent upon authority ruling from City Attorney Bamburg. MOTION CARRIED with Chairman Young voting AYE. Chairman Young closed the public hearing at approximately 7:05 p.m. 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING October 13, 2008 ADJOURNMENT: Without objection, Chairman Young adjourned the meeting at approximately 7:05 p.m. MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully, ___________________________ _____________________________ Susan L. Davitt CHAIRMAN Chad Young CITY CLERK – TREASURER 4