Title
ZV(R) 2023-0005 - 0007, Anthony Arriaga, 2411 NW 102 Way
Summary Explanation and Background
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND:
Anthony Arriaga, owner, submitted three Zoning Variance Requests for the property located in Single Family Residential Zoning District (R-1C).
On September 9, 2022, the city issued a building permit (RX22-03790) to replace existing driveway and front walkway/entryway with pavers. On October 24, 2022, during required building permit inspections, the engineering division noted the construction exceeded the approved plans; subsequently, the inspection failed, and no further inspections have taken place since.
As result of the deviation in the construction of the approved item(s) Mr. Arriaga is requesting:
• ZV(R) 2023-0005 is to allow 40% front lot coverage instead of the allowed 35% for a newly built driveway in a typical single family residential lot.
Also, the property owner, submitted two Zoning Variance requests to legalize exiting conditions in the property. Per survey, existing pool deck/patio is extending closer than the required five feet (5’) setback to rear (north) and side (east) property lines:
• ZV(R) 2023-0006 is to allow zero feet (0’) rear setback along the eastern property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing pool deck/patio.
• ZV(R) 2023-0007 is to allow three feet, six inches (3’ -6”) side setback along the northern property line instead of required five feet (5’) for an existing pool deck/patio.
Per staff findings, the pool deck/patio have been present in the property for several years (early 2000’s) however, there are no permits in city’s records.
The applicant is aware that Board consideration of a residential variance request does not preclude the property owner from obtaining all necessary development related approvals or permits.
The property is located in Woodbridge Community. Per City’s registered HOA list, there no HOA.
VARIANCE REQUEST DETAILS:
ZV(R) 2023-0005: to allow 40% front lot coverage instead of the allowed 35% for a new built driveway in a typical single family residential lot.
ZV(R) 2023-0006: to allow zero feet (0’) rear setback along the eastern property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing pool deck/patio.
ZV(R)2023-0007: to allow three feet, 6 inches (3’ - 6”) side setback along the northern property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing pool deck/patio.
Code References:
Table 155.620 Accessory Buildings and Structures
ZV(R) 2023-0005:
Type, Driveway, Typical Lot, Setback, Maximum Dimensions, 35% front lot coverage
ZV(R) 2023-0006 & 0007:
Type, Pool/Deck, Setback, Side, 5 feet
Type, Pool/Deck, Setback, Rear, 5 feet
VARIANCE DETERMINATION:
The Board of Adjustment shall not grant any single-family residential variances, permits, or make any decision, finding, and determination unless it first determines that:
Its decision and action taken is in harmony with the general purposes of the zoning ordinances of the city and is not contrary to the public interest, health, or welfare, taking into account the character and use of adjoining buildings and those in the vicinity, the number of persons residing or working in the buildings, and traffic conditions in the vicinity.
In the granting of single-family residential variances, the Board shall follow Section 155.301(O) Variance:
1. Purpose: To allow for the provision of relief from certain development standards of this LDC for one or more of the following reasons:
a) There are special circumstances or conditions applying to the land or building for which the variance is sought, which circumstances are peculiar to the land or building and do not apply generally to land or buildings in the neighborhood, and that the strict application of the provisions of the zoning ordinances would result in an unnecessary hardship and deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the land or building; or
b) Any alleged hardship is not self-created by any person having an interest in the property nor is the result of a mere disregard for or in ignorance of the provisions of the zoning ordinances of the city; or
c) Granting the variance is not incompatible with public policy, will not adversely affect any adjacent property owners, and that the circumstances which cause the special conditions are peculiar to the subject property.