TOWN OF CARY
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING
March 11, 2002

 

CASE: 02-V-003

STAFF CONTACT:

Suzanne Prince
Senior Planner
(919) 469-4342
e-mail: sprince@ci.cary.nc.us

APPLICANT(S):

Jennifer Goodwin (Kirby)

OWNER(S):

Jennifer Goodwin (Kirby)

LOCATION:

235 Dutchess Drive, Cary, NC

PRESENT ZONING:

Residential-12 Conditional Use (R-12CU)

SETBACK

Front: 30’
Rear: 25’
Side: 10
From 30’ Type B Buffer: 10’

REQUEST:  The applicant is requesting a variance to encroach within the required 10’ setback of a 30’ Type B buffer.

The applicant is requesting variances as follows:

  1. To permit an existing deck that was constructed in 1996 to encroach 10 feet into the required 10’ setback from a 30’Type B buffer?
  2. To expand the existing deck in an area that does not further the encroachment and to enclose the existing/expanded deck.
  3. To enclose the existing deck as well as the proposed addition.

BACKGROUND:  This is an existing structure that already encroaches the entire 10 feet setback required from the 30’ type B buffer. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the existing structure to remain, to increase the existing structure in an area that does not further the encroachment, and to enclose the structure. 

FACTORS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUANCE OF A VARIANCE:

A variance is intended to provide limited relief from the UDO in those cases where strict application of a particular requirement will create a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship prohibiting the use of land in a manner otherwise allowed under the UDO. A variance is not designed to remove inconveniences or financial burdens imposed on property owners in general, but to provide relief where the requirements of the UDO render the land difficult or impossible to use because of some unique physical attribute of the property itself or some other factor unique to the property for which the variance is requested.

The Board may not grant a variance that would:

The Standard for issuing a variance, as as set forth in Sec. 6.1.5.

  1. The Board may grant a variance, which is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance.
  2. When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships would result from carrying out the strict letter of the zoning ordinance, the Board may vary or modify the regulation or provisions of the ordinance, so that the spirit of the ordinance shall be overserved, public safety and welfare secured and substantial justice done.

PROPOSED FINDING OF FACTS:

1.    The property is owned by Jennifer Goodwin (Kirby), who has requested the variance.

2.    The property has the following dimensions: rear property line is 167.6; the southern side property line is 123.56’; the northern side property line is 172.94; and the front property line is 41.97.

3.    The property has a residence on it.

4.    The property is zoned R-12 Conditional Use which is residential and requires a variance to encroach the entire 10’ setback into the required buffer.

5.    The existing deck is not the result of the applicant’s own doing. The applicant did not own the property at the time the deck was constructed.

6.    The following setbacks apply: this property requires a 30-ft. rear yard setback with an additional 10’ setback from the buffer.

7.    The property presently has a deck that encroaches 10’ feet into the 10’ setback from the required 30’ buffer. The applicant is also asking to extend the deck in a manner, which will not further the encroachment. Further, the applicant is requesting to enclose the entire structure.

8.    The applicant purchased the property with the deck in existence, not knowing of the encroachment.

9.    The applicant desires to enclose an existing deck and enlarge the deck in an area that would not further the encroachment. The applicant is not able to obtain a building permit because of the existing (and proposed) structure that encroaches into the buffer setback.

10.    If the deck cannot be expanded and enclosed, there are other practical uses of the property:

MOTION TO GRANT VARIANCE WITH/WITHOUT CONDITIONS

After conducting a duly advertised public hearing and reviewing the application, testimony and evidence and the general purposes of the UDO, we find the following:

FACTS: [insert facts found]

CONCLUSION:

  1. Based on the application, testimony and evidence, the general purposes of the UDO, and the above findings, the Board concludes that the applicant meets each of the standards set forth for a variance in Section 6.1.5 of the Cary UDO (1) for the existing deck encroachment of 10’ into the 10’ setback from the buffer, as shown on the survey and (2) to enclose the existing deck with addition to be located at 235 Dutchess Drive.
  2. This variance is conditioned upon:

a fence being constructed _________

a buffer to be installed _____

a ________

MOTION TO DENY VARIANCE

After conducting a duly advertised public hearing and reviewing the application, testimony and evidence and the general purposes of the UDO, we find the following:

FACTS: [insert facts found]

 

CONCLUSION:
  1. Based on the application, testimony and evidence, the general purposes of the UDO, and the above findings, the Board concludes that the applicant has not met the standards set forth for a variance in Section 6.1.5 of the Cary UDO, and the application for a variance for the existing deck encroachment of 10 feet into the 10 foot setback is DENIED; and the application for a variance to enclose the existing deck with an addition that encroaches 10 feet into the 10 foot setback is DENIED.

Small Vicinity Map

Large Vicinity Map