Title
ZV(R)2023-0107 - 0111
Yohandy & Yoandy Ramos, 8761 NW 14 Street, (District 2)
Summary Explanation and Background
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND:
Yoandy Ramos, owner, submitted five Zoning Variance requests to legalize an existing driveway, patio and deck for the property located at 8761 NW 14 Street in the Boulevard Heights neighborhood (aka Sunswept west) zoned Single-Family Residential Zoning District (R-1C).
On July 30, 2021, the City’s Code Compliance Division initiated Code Compliance procedures (Case No. 220400109) for work done without building permits.
Mr. Ramos provided an updated property survey (8/31/2023) showing the work done. It appears an unpaved area located directly in the front of the house was filled in. Also, the survey shows two (2) roofed structures encroaching into required side setbacks, per plan, those structures will be permanently removed; however, the owner would like to retain the driveway at existing conditions.
The applicant is requesting the following:
• ZV(R)2023-0107 to allow 70% total front lot coverage instead of the required 35% total front lot coverage for an existing driveway. (TABLED)
• ZV(R)2023-0108 to allow 70% total width of lot instead of the allowed 40% width of lot for an existing driveway. (TABLED)
• ZV(R)2023-0109 to allow one-foot three-inch (1’-3”) side setback along the western property line instead of the required five feet (5’) side setback for an existing driveway. (TABLED)
• ZV(R)2023-0110 to allow zero feet (0’) side setback along a portion of the western property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing deck. (TABLED)
• ZV(R)2023-0111 to allow one-foot seven-inch (1’-7”) side setback along a portion of the eastern property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing patio or deck. (TABLED)
The above requests for the property were heard by the Board on November 2 where the owner was directed to reconsider their request and to possibly provide an alternative plan to increase the existing amount of green space in the front yard. Per the updated plan for the requests, the applicant now is asking:
• ZV(R)2023-0107 to allow 55% total front lot coverage instead of the required 35% total front lot coverage for an existing driveway.
• ZV(R)2023-0108 to allow 70% total width of lot instead of the allowed 40% width of lot for an existing driveway.
• ZV(R)2023-0109 to allow one-foot three-inch (1’-3”) side setback along the western property line instead of the required five feet (5’) side setback for an existing driveway.
• ZV(R)2023-0110 to allow zero feet (0’) side setback along a portion of the western property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing deck.
• ZV(R)2023-0111 to allow one-foot seven-inch (1’-7”) side setback along a portion of the eastern property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing patio or deck.
The existing patio to the east and existing driveway have been present at the property in a similar way since at least 2003 as approved via permit (No. 72316192, see copy approved layout) Also, staff research of city’s archives, found the existing swimming pool at the property was approved in the year 2017 via permit (No. 1744093-0, see copy of approved layout) in conformance with required five-foot side setbacks; however, per the updated property’s survey (8/31/2023), the existing deck is closer than the required five-foot (5’) setback to the west property line; same applies to an existing (approximately) 36’ x 3.5’ patio located along a segment of the east property line, closer than the required five-foot (5’) setback.
The applicant is aware that Board consideration of residential variance requests does not preclude the property owner from obtaining all necessary development related approvals or permits.
Per the City’s registered HOA list, there is no HOA in the neighborhood where the property is located.
VARIANCE REQUEST DETAILS:
ZV(R)2023-0107: is to allow 70% total front lot coverage instead of the required 35% total front lot coverage for an existing driveway.
ZV(R)2023-0108: is to allow 70% total width of lot instead of the allowed 40% width of lot for an existing driveway.
ZV(R)2023-0109: to allow one-foot three-inch (1’-3”) side setback along the western property line instead of the required five feet (5’) side setback for an existing driveway.
ZV(R)2023-0110: is to allow zero feet (0’) side setback along a portion of the western property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing deck / patio.
ZV(R)2023-0111: is to allow a one-foot seven-inch (1’-7”) side setback along a portion of the eastern property line instead of the required five feet (5’) for an existing deck / patio.
Code References:
Table 155.620 Accessory Building and Structures
ZV(R)2023-0107)
Type, Driveway, Typical Lot, Maximum Dimensions, 35% front lot coverage
ZV(R)2023-0108)
Type, Driveway, Typical Lot, Maximum Dimensions, 40 % width of lot
ZV(R)2023-0109)
Type, Driveway, Typical Lot, Setback, Side, 5 feet
Code References:
Table 155.620 Accessory Building and Structures
ZV(R)2023-0110 & 0111)
Type, Deck or Patio, Setback, Side, 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.