Planning staff recommends conditional approval of Variance 1384.  A variance from Section 27-305, Table 27-300.4.9 requiring a maximum building coverage of the lot of 40% to allow a maximum lot coverage of 45% in a Mid-Century Neighborhood Residential (N2) zone.

This is a variance request from Section 27-305, Table 27-300.4.9 requiring a maximum building coverage of the lot of 40% to allow a maximum lot coverage of 45% in a Mid-Century Neighborhood Residential (N2) zone. The property is located at 1816 Avenue C and is developed with a single-family dwelling and detached garage on a 7,000 square foot lot. The applicants, Roger Harding and Amanda Schank Newman, are proposing to install a pergola-mounted photovoltaic (PV) solar array in the rear yard between the dwelling and the detached garage. The proposed structure would increase total building coverage above the maximum allowed. 

The property currently contains a dwelling with a gross first floor area of 1,540 square feet. There is also a detached garage with a gross floor area of 576 square feet, for a combined existing lot coverage of 2,116 square feet (30.2%). The applicants are proposing a 1,069 square foot solar pergola, which would bring the total lot coverage to 3,185 square feet, or approximately 45.5% of the lot. This exceeds the zoning limitation of 40% (2,800 square feet) by 385 square feet, or about 5.5%.

The variance is requested due to site specific conditions that limit traditional solar installation options. The existing south facing roof of the house has been maximized with ten panels, but shading from mature trees on adjacent properties, utility poles, and overhead lines render the detached garage roof ineffective for additional panels. Without another viable surface for solar, the property cannot accommodate a system of sufficient size to meet household and electric vehicle energy demand. Similar lot coverage variances have been requested in other neighborhoods, usually for small additions or accessory structures. This request is unique due to the integration of renewable energy infrastructure and the shading conditions that limit effective use of existing roof surfaces.

APPLICATION DATA
OWNER: Roger Harding and Amanda Newman
PURPOSE: A variance from Section 27-305, Table 27-300.4.9 requiring a maximum building coverage of the lot of 40% to allow a maximum lot coverage of 45% in a Mid-Century Neighborhood Residential (N2) zone
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 37-38, Block 16 of KOBER SUBD 3RD FILING, S36, T01 N, R25 E
ADDRESS: 1816 Avenue C
SIZE OF PARCEL: 7,000 Sq. Ft
ZONING: N2 - Mid-Century Neighborhood
EXISTING LAND USE: Residential
PROPOSED LAND USE: Residential

SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE
NORTH: Zoning: N2 - Mid-Century Neighborhood
Land Use: Residential
SOUTH: Zoning: N2 - Mid-Century Neighborhood
Land Use: Residential
EAST: Zoning: N2 - Mid-Century Neighborhood
Land Use: Residential
WEST: Zoning: N2 - Mid-Century Neighborhood
Land Use: Residential

Planning staff notified the surrounding property owners by mail, placed a legal advertisement in the Yellowstone County News, and posted the property with the required sign. The application was also posted on our web page for current zoning applications. No comments from any surrounding owners were received by staff prior to the completion of this report.

The Board of Adjustment may:

• Conditionally approve the requested variance and adopt the proposed findings of fact for the review criteria as recommended by the Planning staff;
• Approve the requested variance with different or added conditions, or no conditions;
• Deny the requested variance and amend the findings of fact for the criteria;
• Allow the applicant to withdraw the variance request; or
• Delay action on the variance to a future BOA meeting.

Approval or denial of the requested variance will have no financial effect on the Planning Division budget.

Prior to approval, the Board of Adjustment shall ensure that the determinations for variances (Sec. 27-1627.D and E.), as outlined below, have been satisfied:
Section 27-1627.D

1) That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, the lot or something inherent in the land which causes the hardship, and which are not applicable to other lands in the same district.
The subject property is a standard residential lot developed with a single-family dwelling and detached garage. While the lot itself is similar in size and shape to others in the district, site-specific conditions limit its ability to accommodate a functional solar energy system. The detached garage roof, which would otherwise provide an ideal south-facing surface for solar, is heavily shaded by large mature trees located on adjacent properties as well as by utility poles and overhead lines. This shading significantly reduces solar access, making panels placed on the garage roof ineffective.

The existing south-facing roof of the dwelling has already been maximized with a small array of panels, but the available surface is insufficient to meet the property’s total energy needs. Unlike many other residential lots in the district that can utilize garage or house roofs for adequate solar installations, this property’s solar potential is uniquely constrained by neighboring vegetation and utility infrastructure. The proposed pergola mounted array is intended to overcome these shading limitations and provide a viable location for renewable energy generation.

2) That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other tracts in the same district.
If the zoning code is applied strictly, the applicant would be unable to construct the proposed solar pergola. The intent of the structure is to support a renewable energy system, not to create additional living space or parking area. Many other properties in the district are able to place solar arrays on unshaded house or garage roofs and remain within the forty percent lot coverage standard. The subject property is different in that shading from neighboring trees and overhead utility lines prevents effective use of the garage roof, and the house roof is already maximized with a small solar array.

Currently, the property owners cannot generate solar energy at a level comparable to other lots in the district that have suitable roof space. Granting the request would allow this property to achieve a similar use of renewable energy while maintaining the residential character and appearance of the neighborhood.

3) That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this zoning code to other land in the same district.
Approving this variance would not provide the applicant with a special privilege. The request is limited to allowing a pergola that supports a solar array in order to achieve renewable energy generation. Similar variances for lot coverage have been granted in other neighborhoods where property owners slightly exceeded the maximum to accommodate additions or accessory structures. In this case, the structure is designed for energy production rather than to expand living space, and it will remain consistent with the residential use of the lot.

Other property owners in the district with unshaded roofs are able to install solar systems of similar or greater capacity without the need for a variance. Granting this request simply provides the applicant a comparable opportunity to use renewable energy on their property despite shading conditions that limit roof installations. The approval would not create a special privilege but would maintain consistency with what is commonly available to other lots in the district.

4) That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this zoning code and with the Growth Policy.
The general purpose of the zoning code is to promote the health, safety, and welfare of the community while ensuring compatible development within residential neighborhoods. The proposed solar pergola maintains the existing residential use of the property and will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The structure is designed for renewable energy generation and outdoor shading, not to create additional living units or intensify use of the lot. Granting this variance will support the applicant’s ability to invest in their property while remaining consistent with the surrounding development pattern.

The request is also in harmony with the City of Billings 2016 Growth Policy. The project aligns with essential investments by incorporating sustainable energy infrastructure, reducing reliance on the power grid, and providing resilience during outages. It supports strong neighborhoods by allowing a property improvement that is beneficial to the residents without negatively impacting adjacent properties. It advances prosperity by promoting long-term investment in renewable energy, which can help stabilize household energy costs and support a more sustainable community.

Overall, the variance furthers the intent of the zoning code and Growth Policy by enabling renewable energy development in a manner that complements neighborhood character and community goals.

Section 27-1627.E
1) In granting any variance, the Board may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this Zoning Code. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms upon which the variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Zoning Code;
Staff is recommending the following conditions for approval of this variance request. 2) The Board shall prescribe a time limit within which the action for which the variance is required shall be begun or completed, or both. Failure to begin or complete such action within the time limit set shall void the variance.
If the variance is approved; the property owner shall apply for a building permit to construct the solar pergola within 12 months and complete construction within 24 months.
 
3) Under no circumstances shall the Board grant a variance to allow a use not permissible under the terms of this zoning code in the district involved. A variance shall not be a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations placed upon other properties in the district.
The granting of this variance would not allow a use that is not already allowed in the zoning district; the N2 district allows for accessory structures.