VAR2016-00088 1100 w new hampshire - City of …VAR2016-00088 ITEM #5 way and apron are required;...

Property Location: 1100 W. New Hamp-shire St. (Parcel ID #22-22-29-2418-01-180, on the south side of W. New Hampshire St., between Reading and N. Westmoreland Drs.)(±0.20 acres, District 3). Applicant’s Request: The applicant was recently permitted an addition to an existing single-family home, and is requesting the following ancillary variances:

A. Variance of ±5.5 ft. to allow the posts of an attached trellis/pergola ±0.5 ft. from the west side lot line, where a minimum 6 ft. side setback is allowed;

B. Variance to retain an existing driveway and apron, where a reduced width drive-

S U M M A RY

Location Map Subject Site

Applicant

Dawn Michele Evans-Hall The Evans Group, Inc.

Project Planner

Jim Burnett, AICP

Owners

Kevin & Kelly Burroughs

Staff Report to the Board of Zoning Adjustment August 23 , 2016

1100 W. NEW HAMPSHIRE ST. HOME ADDITION

VA R 2 0 1 6 - 0 0 0 8 8 I T E M # 5

way and apron are required; and C. Variance of 0.5 ft. for an existing front

living space (former attached garage) 24.5 ft. from the front lot line, where a mini-mum 25 ft. front setback is required.

Staff’s Recommendation: Approval of Variances A and C, subject to the conditions in the staff report and denial of Variance B.

Public Comment Courtesy notices were mailed to property owners within 300 ft. of the subject property the week of August 8, 2016. As of the pub-lished date of this report, staff has not re-ceived any questions or comments about the variance requests. Updated: August 16, 2016

S = Supports Variances

SUBJECT PROPERTY

RES-LOW/RES-PRO

FU T U R E LA N D US E MA P

SUBJECT PROPERTY

R-1T/W/RP ZO N I N G MA P

R-1A/T

PR O J E C T AN A LY S I S Project Description

The subject property consists of a 1,122 sq. ft. single-story single-family home with an attached single-vehicle garage on a legally conforming lot in the west College Park neighborhood. The owner/applicant secured a permit for a 1,107 sq. ft. addition to the house and needs the following variances for conversion of an attached carport into a trellis/pergola and retention of the existing driveway:

A. Variance of ±1.5 ft. to allow an attached trellis/pergola ±0.5 ft. from the west side lot line, where a minimum 6 ft. side yard setback is allowed for an attached accessory structure;

B. Variance to retain an extended width driveway, where a slightly narrower driveway is required; and

C. Variance of 0.5 ft. for an existing front living space (former attached garage) 24.5 ft. from the front lot line, where a minimum 25 ft. front setback is required.

The property is zoned R-1/T (One-Family Residential, Traditional City Overlay) and is designated as Residential Low Intensity on the City’s Future Land Use Map. Adjacent uses, zoning and future land use designations are shown in Table 1 below.

Previous Actions: 1937: Property platted as part of Edgewater Manor Subdivision. 1941: 1,122 sq. ft. single-family home with attached 1-vehicle garage constructed. 1979: Carport added onto west side of home (attached garage converted to living space - unknown date). 2010: Current owners purchased the property. 8/2016: Permit issued for 1,107 sq. ft. addition to home (BLD2016-05525). Conformance with the LDC As previously noted, the property is zoned R-1 and is located in the Traditional City (T) Overlay, which denotes those areas platted or developed prior to WW2. With a lot size of 66 ft. (w) x 134.4 ft. (d), the 0.20-acre lot is legally con-forming. Applicable development standards are provided in Table 2 below. Analysis Variance A - Land Development Code (LDC) Section 58.901(d) requires the same 6 ft. minimum side yard setback for an accessory structure as the princi-pal structure. An existing attached car-port is to be replaced by an attached trellis/pergola over the existing side parking space. The side posts for the trellis/pergola will be located ±0.5 ft. from the west side lot line, requiring a vari-ance of 5.5 ft. As noted above, an existing carport has been located in the same general location of the side yard since 1979 (per Orange County Property Appraiser records) or before. The proposed attached trellis/pergola is less intrusive than the existing carport and is not being converted to a garage, so staff recommends approval of the variance to allow the trellis/pergola posts to encroach 5.5 ft. into the west side setback.

Variance B - LDC Section 61.240 contains requirements for driveway width. The existing driveway has the required 3-ft. flares in the right-of-way (R-O-W), but the driveway begins to get larger from within the R-O-W, where the flare is required to begin within the subject property. Rather than beginning the taper from within the property, the appli-cant requests to retain the existing front driveway “as is”. The driveway width at the R-O-W line is 16.3 ft. and in-

Table 1 - Project Context Future Land Use Zoning Adjacent Use

North (Across W. New Hampshire St.) Residential Low Intensity (RES-LOW)

R-1/T (One-Family Residential, Traditional City Overlay)

Single-Family Homes

East RES-LOW R-1/T Single-Family Home

South RES-LOW R-1/T Single-Family Homes

West RES-LOW R-1/T Single-Family Home

Table 2 Development Standards (R-1/T)(bold requires VAR)

Principal Structure Setbacks (ft.)

Front (N)

Sides (E & W)

Rear (S)

Max. Ht.

Max. ISR

Max. Front ISR

Requirements 25 6 25 30 55% 40%

Proposed (House) 24.5 6 (E);

±0.5 (W) pergola 33 19 55% 33.7%

creases to 22 ft. width at the front edge of the former at-tached garage (now living space), compliant with Code. Transportation Permitting staff has provided an alternate driveway plan that would retain the existing mature street tree, would remove a small piece of concrete in the R-O-W and would also remove some of the existing driveway within the property, to achieve a maximum driveway width of 20 ft. (per LDC Section 61.302(f)). Thus, staff is not suppor ting the applicant’s request to retain the existing driveway within the property “as is” (see page 6 of this report).

Variance C - During review of the variance, staff noticed that the attached garage appears to have previously been converted to living space, likely in 1979, when the car-port was added to the west side of the house. Per the sur-vey and site plans provided by the applicant, this results in a 24.5 ft. front setback, where 25 ft. is the minimum allowed in the R-1/T zoning district.

Given that the one required parking space is paved and located in a Code-compliant location adjacent to the house, behind the front façade of the home, staff supports this after-the-fact variance (merely as a clean-up item).

W. NEW HAMPSHIRE ST.

SUBJECT PROPERTY

AERIAL PHOTO

2015 SU RV E Y

SI T E PH O TO S

FRONT VIEW OF HOUSE AND DRIVEWAY, WITH EXISTING CARPORT ON THE RIGHT (WEST SIDE)

FRONT VIEW OF HOUSE, WITH DRIVEWAY TO THE RIGHT (WEST)

VARIANCE B Retain existing 22-ft. driveway width and area (see detail below).

VARIANCE A Poles for new trellis/pergola to be ±0.5 ft. from west lot line, where a minimum 6 ft. side setback is required (variance of ±5.5 ft.).

SI T E PL A N W I T H F L O O R P L A N

24

.5 ft

.

PRE-EXISTING HOUSE

NEW HOUSE ADDITION

NEW PORCH

Shed to be Removed

VARIANCE C 24.5 ft. setback between former garage and front lot line, where a minimum 25 ft. setback is required (variance of 0.5 ft.).

CODE-COMPLIANT DRIVEWAY & PARKING WOULD REQUIRE REMOVAL OF A SMALL AMOUNT OF CONCRETE IN THE R-O-W AND REMOVAL OF SOME EXISTING CONCRETE WITHIN THE PROPERTY, TO ACHIEVE A MAXIMUM 20 FT. WIDE DRIVEWAY.

Remove

sidewalk

W. New Hampshire St.

≤20 FT.

VARIANCES FOR TRELLIS/PERGOLA, DRIVEWAY & FRONT SETBACK A. Variance of ±5.5 ft. to allow the poles of an attached trellis/pergola ±0.5 ft. from the lot line, where a minimum

6 ft. side yard setback is required for accessory structures in the R-1/T zoning district (per LDC Section 58.901(d));

B. Variance to retain the existing front driveway and aprons (per LDC Section 61.240 and City Engineering Stand-ards Manual); and

C. Variance of ±0.5 ft. for an existing front living space (former attached garage) to remain 24.5 ft. from the front lot line, where a minimum 25 ft. front setback is required (per LDC Section 58 Figure FG-1STD1.LDC).

Staff Recommendation: Approval of Variances A & C, based on the finding that said variances meet all six (6) standards for approval of a variance, subject to the following conditions, and denial of Vari- ance B, based on the finding that said variance fails to meet all six (6) variance criteria:

1. Development shall be in strict conformance with all conditions and the survey and photographs found in this report, subject to any modification by the Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA) and/or City Council. Minor modifications to the approved variance may be approved by the Zoning Official. Major modifications, as de-termined by the Zoning Official, shall require additional review by the BZA.

2. All applicable City, county, state or federal permits must be obtained before commencing development. 3. Appearance Review is required at time of permitting (for the ENG permit) to ensure compliance with these conditions.

4. The proposed trellis feature over the side parking space must be in keeping with the style and architecture of the home. To that end, appropriately scaled columns and decorative brackets must be used.

5. Lattice shall not be used to screen the roof of the trellis. Driveway/Front Parking Area 6. The apron must be installed according to the City’s Engineering Standard Manual, minus the small piece of

driveway located in the R-O-W. 7. Driveway taper must begin no less than 5 ft. from the edge of the sidewalk/property line at an angle of no less than 45 degrees in relation to sidewalk. 8. The driveway flare must be two (2) feet away from the property line and the driveway flare must be 3 ft. wide. 9. Driveway width at the throat must not exceed 16 ft. and mean/maximum driveway width shall not exceed 20 ft.

Informational Comment: 1. Maximum front yard impervious surface coverage must not exceed 40% (current proposal is at 33%).

Note to Applicant: The proposed variances only address the Land Development Code standards expressly represented in this staff report and any relief to such standards as approved. The relief granted through the variance(s) is restricted to the subject property as noted in the staff report and is not transferable to other parcels of land.

The next step in this variance request is City Council consideration of the Board of Zoning Adjustment's recommended action (provided it is not appealed) at an upcoming City Council meeting. Possible City Council approval of this variance request does not constitute final approval to carry out the development proposed in this application. The applicant shall comply with all oth-er applicable requirements of the Land Development Code, including any additional review requirements, and shall receive all necessary permits before initiating development. Please contact the Permitting Services Division of the City of Orlando to in-quire about your next steps toward receiving a building permit.

Disclaimer - As provided by subsection 166.033(5), Florida Statutes, issuance of a variance by a municipality does not in any way create any right on the part of an applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liabil-ity on the part of the municipality for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obli-gations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. In accord-ance with subsection 166.033(5), Florida Statutes, it is hereby made a condition of this variance that all other applicable state or federal permits be obtained before commencement of the development.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Special Conditions and Circumstances

Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applica-ble to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. Zoning violations or nonconformities on neighboring properties shall not constitute grounds for approval of any proposed Zoning Variance.

S T A N D A R D S F O R V A R I A N C E A P P R O V A L

Not Self-Created

The special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the applicant. A self-created hardship shall not justify a Zoning Variance; i.e., when the applicant himself by his own conduct creates the hardship which he alleges to exist, he is not entitled to relief.

No Special Privilege Conferred

Approval of the Zoning Variance requested shall not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to oth-er lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district.

Deprivation of Rights Literal interpretation of the provisions contained in this Chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of this Chapter and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. Financial loss or business competition shall not constitute grounds for approval of any variance. Purchase of property with intent to devel-op in violation of the restrictions of this Chapter shall also not constitute grounds for approval.

Minimum Possible Variance

The Zoning Variance requested is the mini-mum variance that will make possible the rea-sonable use of the land, building or structure.

Purpose and Intent

Approval of the Zoning Variance will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Chapter and such Zoning Variance will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.

Meets Standard Yes No

Approval of the variance would be viewed as being harmonious with the purpose and intent of the Code. Continued use of the property with-in Code requirements will continue to promote the appearance and character of the immediate neighborhood. Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare.


The variance requested is the minimum possible variance to allow re-placement of the carport with a less obtrusive trellis/pergola in the same general location.

Meets Standard Yes No Denial of the variance would pose an additional burden on the owners, as they currently have an existing permitted carport and merely want to replace it with a less obtrusive trellis/pergola in the same general loca-tion.

Meets Standard Yes No Approval of the variance would not confer a special privilege, based on the special conditions and circumstances related to the variance request.


The owner purchased the property in 2010, with the existing carport in the current location, with posts 0.5 ft. from the west side lot line. The owner is merely replacing the carport roof with a trellis/pergola.

Meets Standard Yes No The property consists of a 1,122 sq. ft. 1-story single-family home with an attached single-vehicle carport on a legally conforming interior lot in the College Park neighborhood. The owner is adding on to the home, including minor site improvements including replacement of the carport with a decorative trellis/pergola over the west side driveway.

V A R I A N C E A : A L L O W T R E L L I S / P E R G O L A P O S T S ± 0 . 5 F T . F R O M T H E W E S T S I D E L O T L I N E ,

W H E R E A M I N I M U M 6 F T . S I D E S E T B A C K I S R E Q U I R E D ( ± 5 . 5 F T . V A R I A N C E )




Not Self-Created







Purpose and Intent



Approval of the variance could be viewed as being harmonious with the purpose and intent of the Code. Continued use of the property within Code requirements will continue to promote the appearance and charac-ter of the immediate neighborhood. Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare.

Meets Standard Yes No The variance requested is not the minimum possible to allow retention of the existing driveway and parking area.

Meets Standard Yes No Denial of the variance would not create an undue burden on the owner.

Meets Standard Yes No Approval of the variance could be viewed as conferring a special privi-lege, based on the special conditions and circumstances of the property relative to the existing driveway size.


The owner purchased the property in 2010, with the existing driveway, parking area and aprons/flares in the current configuration.


The property consists of a 1,122 sq. ft. 1-story single-family home with an attached single-vehicle carport on a legally conforming interior lot in the College Park neighborhood. The owner is adding on to the home, including minor site improvements and is looking to retain a slightly larger driveway/parking pad and aprons/flares within the adjacent street R-O-W.

V A R I A N C E B : R E T A I N E X I S T I N G D R I V E W A Y A N D A P R O N S , W H E R E N A R R O W E R D R I V E W A Y

A N D R E D U C E D F L A R E S A R E R E Q U I R E D




Not Self-Created







Purpose and Intent



Approval of the variance would be viewed as being harmonious with the purpose and intent of the Code. Continued use of the property with-in Code requirements will continue to promote the appearance and character of the immediate neighborhood. Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare.


The variance requested is the minimum possible variance to allow the former garage (now living space) to remain 24.5 ft. from the front lot line.

Meets Standard Yes No Denial of the variance would create an undue burden on the owner, in that they’d have to remove a small portion of the former attached gar-age to meet Code.

Meets Standard Yes No Approval of the variance would not confer a special privilege, based on the special conditions and circumstances of the property.


The owner purchased the property in 2010, with the door for the exist-ing attached garage intact but the interior area having previously been converted to living space without benefit of a variance or Modification of Standards.


The property consists of a 1,122 sq. ft. 1-story single-family home with an attached single-vehicle carport on a legally conforming interior lot in the College Park neighborhood. The owner is adding on to the home, including minor site improvements.

V A R I A N C E C : R E T A I N A N E X I S T I N G 2 4 . 5 F T . F R O N T S E T B A C K ( F R O M A P R E V I O U S L Y

E N C L O S E D G A R A G E ) , W H E R E A M I N I M U M 2 5 F T . S E T B A C K I S R E Q U I R E D ( V A R I A N C E O F 0 . 5 F T . )

A P P L I C A N T ’ S P R O J E C T D E S C R I P T I O N

A P P L I C A N T ’ S R E S P O N S E S T O V A R I A N C E R E Q U E S T S

VAR2016-00088 1100 w new hampshire - City of …VAR2016-00088 ITEM #5 way and apron are required;...

Documents

Transcript of VAR2016-00088 1100 w new hampshire - City of …VAR2016-00088 ITEM #5 way and apron are required;...