a.
City Board of Adjustment
- Meeting Date:
- 07/03/2019
- SUBJECT
- Variance #1295 - 2410 Flagstone Drive
- THROUGH:
- Nicole Cromwell
- PRESENTED BY:
- Karen Husman
Information
REQUEST
Variance #1295 The applicant is requesting a variance from 27-604(c) requiring a maximum of 6 feet in height to allow an 8 foot fence/wall in an Residential 9,600 (R-96) zone, on Block 1, Lot 3, Castlewood Sub. 3rd Filing, S27, T1N, R25E, a 10,943 square foot parcel of land. The purpose of the variance is to allow construction of an 8 foot fence adjacent to Zimmerman Trail. Tax ID: A20383. Presented by; Karen Husman, Planner I.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends conditional approval of the variance.
APPLICATION DATA
OWNERS: Charles & Jolynn Sommers
PURPOSE: Allow an 8 foot fence
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Block 1, Lot 3, Castlewood Subd., 3rd Filing
ADDRESS: 3410 Flagstone Dr.
EXISTING LAND USE: Residential
PROPOSED LAND USE: Residential
EXISTING ZONING: R-96
PURPOSE: Allow an 8 foot fence
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Block 1, Lot 3, Castlewood Subd., 3rd Filing
ADDRESS: 3410 Flagstone Dr.
EXISTING LAND USE: Residential
PROPOSED LAND USE: Residential
EXISTING ZONING: R-96
CONCURRENT APPLICATIONS
None
APPLICABLE ZONING HISTORY
| SUBJECT PROPERTY | VARIANCE # | DATE | FOR | APPROVED (Y/N) | ADDITIONAL DATA |
| None | |||||
| SIMILAR PROPERTY |
|||||
| 3629 Vickery Drive | Variance 811 | Jan 5, 2000 | 8-foot fence | Yes | grade change between lots |
| 3724 & 3730 Vickery Court | Variance 1156 | July 10, 2013 | 8-foot fence | Yes | grade change between lots |
| 4505 Loma Vista Dr | Variance 882 | Nov 14, 2002 | 10-foot fence | Yes | To prevent basketballs from escaping on to Rimrock Rd |
| 2740 Gregory Drive S | Variance 816 | May 2 2000 | 9-foot fence | Yes | grade change between lots and Rimrock Rd |
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING
NORTH: Zoning: R-96
Land Use: Residential Single Family
SOUTH: Zoning: R-96
Land Use: Residential Single Family
EAST: Zoning: R-96
Land Use: Residential Single Family
WEST: Zoning: R-96
Land Use: Residential Single Family
Land Use: Residential Single Family
SOUTH: Zoning: R-96
Land Use: Residential Single Family
EAST: Zoning: R-96
Land Use: Residential Single Family
WEST: Zoning: R-96
Land Use: Residential Single Family
BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting a variance from a maximum of 6 feet in height to allow an eight-foot fence. The purpose of the variance is to allow construction of an eight-foot fence adjacent to Zimmerman Trail. Attached photos provide evidence the Zimmerman Trail right of way (ROW) appears to be several feet higher than the grade of the bottom edge of the existing fence. In this instance, the topography of the land is the primary reason for the variance.
The applicant would like to have an eight-foot fence to prevent pedestrians as well as vehicles from having a clear visual into their back yard. Having an eight-foot fence would buffer the residents from view, and allow their yard more privacy.
Planning staff has reviewed this application and is forwarding a recommendation of conditional approval for the variance based on the determinations for review provided within this report.
The applicant would like to have an eight-foot fence to prevent pedestrians as well as vehicles from having a clear visual into their back yard. Having an eight-foot fence would buffer the residents from view, and allow their yard more privacy.
Planning staff has reviewed this application and is forwarding a recommendation of conditional approval for the variance based on the determinations for review provided within this report.
SUMMARY
Proposed DETERMINATIONS for Variance 1295:
The Board of Adjustment shall make the following determinations prior to granting a variance:
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;
There are special circumstances that exist in this situation. The subject property is at an elevation lower than the right of way (ROW) known as Zimmerman Trail. A six-foot fence does not give the owner the same privacy as it would if the ROW was level with the property.
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;
The subject property is in a subdivision where there have been several lot size variances. Denying the variance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other tracts in the same district. Other tracts in the district have a fence that obstructs the view of their yard and provides a privacy the subject property does not have due to the higher elevation of the ROW.
3. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to other land in the same district;
The variance will not allow the applicant any special privileges. The circumstances in this situation show the eight foot fence would allow the property owner the same privacy as other properties that have adjacent property at the same grade level.
4. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter and with the Growth Policy;
The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning regulations and the growth policy.
5. In granting any variance, the Board may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this Chapter. 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 Chapter;
Staff is recommending the following conditions for the variance request:
6. 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; and
The property owner shall complete construction of the new fence within on year of approval of the variance.
7. Under no circumstances shall the Board grant a variance to allow a use not permissible under the terms of this Chapter in the district involved. A variance shall not be a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations placed upon other property in the district.
The granting of this variance would not allow a use that is not allowed in the zoning district – fences are allowed in the R-96 zone.
The Board of Adjustment shall make the following determinations prior to granting a variance:
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;
There are special circumstances that exist in this situation. The subject property is at an elevation lower than the right of way (ROW) known as Zimmerman Trail. A six-foot fence does not give the owner the same privacy as it would if the ROW was level with the property.
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;
The subject property is in a subdivision where there have been several lot size variances. Denying the variance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other tracts in the same district. Other tracts in the district have a fence that obstructs the view of their yard and provides a privacy the subject property does not have due to the higher elevation of the ROW.
3. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to other land in the same district;
The variance will not allow the applicant any special privileges. The circumstances in this situation show the eight foot fence would allow the property owner the same privacy as other properties that have adjacent property at the same grade level.
4. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter and with the Growth Policy;
The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning regulations and the growth policy.
5. In granting any variance, the Board may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this Chapter. 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 Chapter;
Staff is recommending the following conditions for the variance request:
1. The variance is to allow an eight-foot fence in the rear yard adjacent to Zimmerman Trail only. No other variance is intended or implied with this approval.
2. The variance is limited to Block 1, Lot 3, Castlewood Sub., 3rd Filing, generally located at 3410 Flagstone Drive.
3. The applicant shall meet all other city code requirements with the exception of this variance.
4. The property owner must submit and receive approval of a building permit within 6 months of approval of this variance, and complete construction within one year.
5. These conditions of variance approval shall run with the land described in this authorization and shall apply to all current and subsequent owners, operators, managers, lease holders, heirs and assigns.
2. The variance is limited to Block 1, Lot 3, Castlewood Sub., 3rd Filing, generally located at 3410 Flagstone Drive.
3. The applicant shall meet all other city code requirements with the exception of this variance.
4. The property owner must submit and receive approval of a building permit within 6 months of approval of this variance, and complete construction within one year.
5. These conditions of variance approval shall run with the land described in this authorization and shall apply to all current and subsequent owners, operators, managers, lease holders, heirs and assigns.
6. 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; and
The property owner shall complete construction of the new fence within on year of approval of the variance.
7. Under no circumstances shall the Board grant a variance to allow a use not permissible under the terms of this Chapter in the district involved. A variance shall not be a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations placed upon other property in the district.
The granting of this variance would not allow a use that is not allowed in the zoning district – fences are allowed in the R-96 zone.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Conditional Approval.