HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppeal 112116 SRDate Appeal Received: 11/07/16
Date Application Considered as Complete: 11/07/16
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Jessica Loftus, City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc
Date: 16 November 2016
Subject: Appeal Administrative Decision
Jeff & Pia Schutt, 2750 Casco Point Road
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Appeal Application
Exhibit B. Description
Exhibit C. As-Built Survey
Exhibit D. Letter: As-Built Review 10/25/16
Exhibit E. City Code Sections
Exhibit F. Photos
Background
The applicants recently constructed a new residence at the property addressed 2750 Casco
Point Road. The property is within the LR-1C zoning district requiring 10 foot side setbacks for
principal structures. During the process of finaling out the permits, an as-built survey was
submitted by the builder and reviewed by staff. Upon review it was evident that a
pergola/arbor structure was constructed over a retaining wall very near the property line. A
permit was not issued for this pergola/ arbor structure, nor was it shown on the original site
plan.
Applicable regulation
Section 78-96 Board established Subsection (a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
(a) A zoning board of appeals and adjustments is established. The planning
commission is constituted as the board of appeals and adjustments. The board
shall have the following powers:
(1) To hear and decide appeals from any affected person where it is alleged
that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision or
determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of
this chapter.
(2) To hear requests for variances in accordance with this chapter.
(3) To exercise other functions as provided in this chapter.
The appeal process provides an opportunity for an applicant to present facts and prove that the
city official erred in applying the ordinance to the issue in question.
#16-3884
21 November 2016
Page 2 of 2
Discussion
The applicants have constructed a narrow pergola or arbor over the 11 foot long retaining wall
less than 2 feet from the side lot line, and detached from the home. Because pergolas are not
specifically defined in the Code staff reviewed the structure against the Accessory Structure and
Nonencroachment standards.
Accessory structures less than 750 square feet are addressed in the Nonencroachment
provisions under Sections 78-1405(a) 5 and 6 which state that no less than a 5 foot rear, and a
10 foot side setback shall be required for accessory structures. Alternatively, in an effort to find
an appropriate regulation, because the pergola is linear, and similar in design to a fence, staff
reviewed the fence standards within the Nonencroachment section. The pergola in the current
location would need to be reduced to no greater than 6 feet in height (the maximum height of a
fence) to meet the fence standards and remain in the current location.
The applicants contend that Section 78-1405(a)1 is applicable. Staff notes that this section
relates to building elements which are attached to the building, and are required to be at least 8
feet from the lot line (for this zoning district). The pergola is 2 feet from the property line. The
Planning Commission must find that the arbor is consistent with those listed
nonencroachments, and the provision that the 2 foot maximum extension does not apply.
Action requested
The Planning Commission should review the application and make a decision regarding the
appeal.