TOWN OF CARY
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING
May 13, 2002 

CASE: 02-V-005

STAFF CONTACT:

Beth Lewis
Planner
(919) 469-4342
e-mail: ehlewis@ci.cary.nc.us

APPLICANT(S):

Jeffery Hurley

OWNER(S):

Jeffery and Barbara Hurley

LOCATION:

2100 W. Marilyn Circle, Cary, NC 27513

PRESENT ZONING:

Residential-12  (R-12)

SETBACK

 Twenty (20) feet from West Marilyn Circle, the front yard.
Eighteen (18) feet from Marilyn Circle, the corner side yard.
Twenty-five (25) from the rear property line, opposite West Marilyn Circle.
Ten (10) feet from the interior side yard, opposite Marilyn Circle.

REQUEST:  The applicants are requesting a variance to replace an existing deck that is in poor repair and encroaches eight (8) feet into the required twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback. The replacement structure as proposed will be a screened porch and a covered storage area underneath the porch structure in the same place as the existing deck. The proposed porch and storage area will encroach the required twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback by eight (8) feet, just as the existing deck currently encroaches.

FACTORS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUANCE OF A VARIANCE:

A variance 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, 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 variance that would:

The Standard for issuing a variance, 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 observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done.

PROPOSED FINDING OF FACTS:
  1. Jeffery and Barbara Hurley, who own the property, have requested the variance.
  2. The property has the following dimensions. 202.7 feet along West Marilyn Circle, the front yard; 202.7 feet along the rear yard; 122.0 feet along Marilyn Circle, the corner side yard; and 122.0 feet along the interior side yard.
  3. The property is not vacant.
  4. The property is zoned R-12, which is Residential and requires a twenty (20) foot setback from West Marilyn Circle, an eighteen (18) foot corner side yard setback from Marilyn Circle, a twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback, and a ten (10) foot interior side yard setback, opposite Marilyn Circle.

    5. ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS THAT MAY BE MADE CONCERNING PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES/UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS:
  5. There are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships that exist on the property. The lot has a traditional rectangular shape. However, it is a corner lot, and the house is situated so that the front of the home faces what would normally be considered as the corner side property line. Therefore, the large front and rear yard setbacks are imposed on the structure across the shorter width of the property, rather than along the more traditional, and longer, length of the property. If the home faced Marilyn Circle, in a more traditional manner, no required setbacks would be encroached with this addition. Additionally, a deck exists. The existing deck would be removed and a new screened room and storage underneath would go in its place. No further encroachment would occur.

    6.                                                             OR

    There are no practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships that exist on the property.

                                                                OR

    Other:
  6. The conditions are the result of the applicant’s own doing.

    7.                                                             OR

    The conditions are not the result of the applicant’s own doing. The house was situated as it is when the applicant purchased the home, and the deck existed at the time the applicant purchased the home.

                                                                OR

    Other:
  7. The applicant is not able to obtain a building permit for a replacement deck because the new screened structure would encroach the required rear yard setback, as does the existing deck.

    8.

  8. There is insufficient space on the property to construct the proposed addition of a size and in a manner compatible with the surrounding property without encroaching the setbacks.

                                                                   OR

There is not insufficient space on the property to construct the proposed addition of a size and in a manner compatible with the surrounding property without encroaching the setbacks.

                                                                        OR

    Other

9.    If the screened porch and enclosed storage area below cannot be constructed, there is other practical use of the property.

    CONCERNING OBSERVING THE SPIRIT OF THE UDO, DOING SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AND SECURING SAFETY AND WELFARE:
10.    Construction of the screened porch and enclosed storage area beneath will have a negative effect on adjoining property.

                                                                        OR

Construction of the screened porch and enclosed storage area beneath will not have a negative impact on adjoining property.

                                                                         OR

Other:

 

11.    Construction of the screened porch and storage area beneath will impair emergency access, create a fire hazard, or otherwise be contrary to the public health.

                   OR

    Construction of the screened porch and storage area beneath will not impair emergency access, create a fire hazard, or otherwise be contrary to the public health.

                                                                     OR

    Other:

12.  Requiring certain conditions to be met will alleviate the problems with granting the variance.    

               OR

Requiring certain conditions to be met will not alleviate the problems with granting the variance.

               OR

Other.

 

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 of eight (8) feet to the required 25 foot rear yard setback to construct a screened porch and storage area underneath at 2100 West Marilyn Circle, as spelled out in Section 6.1.5 of the Cary UDO.
  2. The applicant is hereby granted a variance to construct a screened porch and storage area underneath to be located in the same location as the existing deck at 2100 West Marilyn Circle.
  3. 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 of eight (8) feet to the required 25 foot rear yard setback to construct a screened porch and storage area underneath at 2100 West Marilyn Circle, as spelled out in Section 6.1.5 of the Cary UDO, and the application is DENIED.

 

Small Vicinity
Large Vicinity