Frank Nelson, 14386 Embry Court, has applied for an 8' principal structure rear yard setback variance to construct a 224 sq. ft. four season porch addition. The home is located in a cul-de-sac and has an irregularly shaped lot. The proposed porch abuts the southern property line, which is the rear property line of the home. Due to the angle of the rear lot line, and the 30' principal structure setback, the home is restricted on it's size.
The rear lot line, per code section 155.033 is defined as any line opposite of the front lot line this creates an angled, irregular rear lot line for this property. Adjacent properties are able to meet their rear yard setbacks due to regular lot configurations, thus the impact that the proposed porch will have on adjacent properties is minimal.
While reviewing the proposal, staff found that the existing shed does not meet setback requirements, and has been placed in an easement. A building permit was not issued for this shed, and no prior variances were granted. The shed is approximately 20 years old, and is a permanent structure that cannot be moved without demolition. The applicant is seeking variances on the side yard and rear yard setback requirements.
Three variance actions are requested as part of this application. The primary item of this application is a rear yard setback variance for the principal structure from 30' to 22' for the construction of a 224 sq. ft. four season porch.
The second and third actions are side yard and rear yard setback variances for an existing shed on the property. These actions were added as requests by the applicant due to the non-conformity found during review. The shed is located 4' 7" (5' 6" variance) from the rear property line where 10' is required and 2' 6" from the side property line where 5' is required (2' 6" variance). City code allows setbacks to be rounded to the nearest 6".
Principal Structure Setback
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan states that the City will encourage "the reinvestment and maintenance of property" that allow residents to age in place.
Staff is recommending approval of the principal structure rear yard setback variance for the four season porch due to the following practical difficulties.
- The lot is irregular, and creates a scenario where a portion of the home does not have the same rear setback as another portion.
- The rear lot line is angled, creating an inconsistent setback along the rear lot line. The variance would not be necessary if the lot line were consistent.
- The position of the porch on the home can not be shifted to reduce the variance due to a cantilevered section of the home.
- The City has encouraged residents to update and maintain their homes.
Accessory Structure Setback
Upon review of the proposal, staff found that an existing shed had non-conforming side yard and rear yard setback standards for accessory structures. The shed was constructed approximately 20 years ago, and was not required to receive a building permit. Additionally, the property has 5' side and rear drainage and utility easements, which the shed encroaches on. If proposed today, staff would not permit the structure, and would not recommend approval of a variance for a new structure. However, as this structure was built approximately 20 years ago the shed will not negatively impact the character of the neighborhood.
The applicant is seeking additional variances for the rear yard and side yard setbacks for an accessory structure. As stated, the rear requires a 5' 6" variance, and the side requires a 2' 6" variance in order to be compliant. If granted, a condition has been placed that an encroachment agreement be completed with the City or the shed shall be removed within one year of the date of approval of this variance. This agreement will state that in the event the City needs access to the easements for any work the shed will be removed at the cost of the applicant. The applicant has stated that the shed cannot be moved, short of demolishing the structure due to the solid construction and concrete slab base.
Practical Difficulties
Staff reviews variance applications based strictly upon the requirements of the state statutes and the City Code which require that the applicant establish that there are practical difficulties present in order for a variance to be granted, and that logical alternatives are not available.
Definition of “Practical Difficulties”:
- The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning provisions of the code;
- The plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant; and
- The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
- Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
In order to grant a variance, the City considers the following factors to determine whether the applicant established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provision(s) of the Code:
1. Special conditions apply to the structure or land in question that are particular to the property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district or vicinity in which the land is located; and
2. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this chapter; and
3. The special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the owner/applicant; and
4. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate practical difficulties in complying with the zoning provisions of this Code; and
5. The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty.