04-28-1994 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting ZBOA

Browse Search

Page 3 of 4 Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report of OS/26/94 V94-006 oriented so East "E" is the front and Park is the rear. It is staff s view that the twenty feet rear setback was established based on the fact that most through lots would be backed by thoroughfares. Examples of this situation are the homes in Fairmont Park and Glen Meadows that abut West Main Street. In these types of cases, there is a clear interest in maintaining an adequate building setback for safety reasons. There have unfortunately, been traffic accidents that have left vehicles in people's back yards. As noted however, Park Street is not a thoroughfare. It is a two lane, local collector. The thirty mile per hour speed is much lower that is found on most thoroughfares. As illustrated on Exhibit B, the applicant's rear property line is approximately forty-five feet from the edge of the street paving. This forty-five feet contains a drainage swale. This degree of separation between the paved street and property line in conjunction with the physical barrier provided by the drainage ditch should provide an adequate safety margin. As far as staff can determine there are no plans in the foreseeable future for any widening or upgrade of Park Drive. It is to remain a two lane local collector street. Finally to be considered, is the type of structure being proposed. The applicants plan to erect a patio awning. There are to be no enclosing walls. Under normal circumstance, this type of structure is allowed to extend to within three feet of a rear property line (section 10-401.3). One corner of the awning will project beyond the three feet setback point. This is a result of the triangular lot shape. Although the awning could certainly be shortened by a foot, staff would note that as proposed the structure is, by residential standards not unusually large. As illustrated on Exhibit B, at closest proximity to property line, a setback of two feet would be maintained. The awning is intended to cover a recently constructed concrete patio deck. This patio deck (which was properly permitted) complies with all ordinance requirements. By ordinance, decks and terraces that are not over one feet above average grade may extend to within two feet of any property line (Section 10- 401.2). As proposed, the awing in will extend just far enough beyond the deck's perimeter to keep the drip line off the patio (See Exhibit B). As proposed, the awning will be located far enough from Park Street to satisfy safety concerns. There are presently, no plans for improving or expanding Park Drive. Construction of the awning should therefore not be contrary to the best public interest.